Fairings for upright bikes?

check with the people at ZZip fairings. they have experience.

Pat in TX

Quoted message said:

The fretting about removing the cooling breeze is a red herring.

Come down here and try riding without it. You'll *be* the red
herring.

Quoted message said:

The worries about race rules are likewise lame---99% of riding is in
non-events. Everyone likes more easy speed.

Try riding an upright in a crosswind with a full fairing. For that
matter, try riding one along the shoulder of a busy highway with
trucks popping 55mph+ gusts at you as they pass by. Speed is trumped
by what's possible in real circumstances. Full fairings on an upright
are for intense, controlled-conditions competition only.

Quoted message said:

A simple "bullet" under an aerobar might really give a nice boost (and
place to store water, food, spare/tool). Same with a compact "bulb"
behind the saddle---if a push-plate is included that might be something
helpful to shove against sometimes.

If you believe there is a real or potential demand for this, get the
investors lined up, devise the products, and take them to the proving
grounds of the market.

Quoted message said:

Then there's filling in the area between seat and dropouts to
streamline the rear wheel.

It's been done. From a speed standpoint, the effect is too small to
justify the weight. Such a shield is commonly employed to keep cargo
and kidlegs out of the spokes, though. My ancient Puch has one on
each side.

Quoted message said:

Maybe putting little shells around the
derailleurs. What about a faired pedal?

All that is generally achieved by such is an increase in weight and
frontal area, neither of which aids speed.

Quoted message said:

Could some kind of narrow fairing attached to the fork improve airflow
around legs?

Please try this. Let me know when and where, and I'll sell tickets.

Quoted message said:

Any simple way to give a jersey a streamlined boost? (Maybe "batwings"
under the arms.)

Smooth and snug; wings *increase* frontal area, and are a bad idea.

Quoted message said:

I'd think that maybe a couple pounds of carbon add-ons could give a few
mph of free speed. Not bad.

TANSTAAFL.
--
Typoes are a feature, not a bug.
Some gardening required to reply via email.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

Werehatrack said:

Quoted message said:

The fretting about removing the cooling breeze is a red herring.

Come down here and try riding without it. You'll *be* the red
herring.

?? I prefer to ride in cooler climes where most riding is done.
Herring!

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The worries about race rules are likewise lame---99% of riding is in
non-events. Everyone likes more easy speed.

Try riding an upright in a crosswind with a full fairing.

Herring! Who said anything about full fairing? Or any fairing that
impairs handling?

Quoted message said:

For that
matter, try riding one along the shoulder of a busy highway with
trucks popping 55mph+ gusts at you as they pass by.

Herring! I'll stick to non-busy non-freeway rides, like 99% of other
cyclists.

Quoted message said:

Speed is trumped
by what's possible in real circumstances. Full fairings on an upright
are for intense, controlled-conditions competition only.

Quoted message said:

A simple "bullet" under an aerobar might really give a nice boost (and
place to store water, food, spare/tool). Same with a compact "bulb"
behind the saddle---if a push-plate is included that might be something
helpful to shove against sometimes.

If you believe there is a real or potential demand for this, get the
investors lined up, devise the products, and take them to the proving
grounds of the market.

?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Then there's filling in the area between seat and dropouts to
streamline the rear wheel.

It's been done.

Links to stats?

Quoted message said:

From a speed standpoint, the effect is too small to
justify the weight.

Two sheets of carbon weigh...?

Quoted message said:

Such a shield is commonly employed to keep cargo
and kidlegs out of the spokes, though. My ancient Puch has one on
each side.

Different item. No relevance.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Maybe putting little shells around the
derailleurs. What about a faired pedal?

All that is generally achieved by such is an increase in weight and
frontal area, neither of which aids speed.

Stats?

I see that racers use smooth-top shoes today. The bottoms should be
smooth, too, including the pedal.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Could some kind of narrow fairing attached to the fork improve airflow
around legs?

Please try this. Let me know when and where, and I'll sell tickets.

Oh, I've done it. I'm just wondering about recent developments. People
are always fiddling with bike speed R&D.

When I made my test, I used heavy foam and was trying to make aero
panniers. They worked great. Anyone looking for speed alone would
simplify things. Someone out there has to be serious about touring AND
have carbon-molding skill, or an interest in learning. It's not too
tough. Here's a link to a graphic and my report:

http://www.outyourbackdoor.com/OYB8/bikes/bikeaerobag.html

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Any simple way to give a jersey a streamlined boost? (Maybe "batwings"
under the arms.)

Smooth and snug; wings *increase* frontal area, and are a bad idea.

No. I've seen info about jerseys that fair the arm to shoulder.

It seems as though racing has limited R&D in bike speed even though
statistically no one races. It has to be that less than 1% of fast
sport riding occurs in races. Riders could have fun with aero aides for
all that other riding. And science people could have fun testing.

Quoted message said:

Werehatrack said:

Quoted message said:

The fretting about removing the cooling breeze is a red herring.

Come down here and try riding without it. You'll *be* the red
herring.

?? I prefer to ride in cooler climes where most riding is done.
Herring!

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The worries about race rules are likewise lame---99% of riding is in
non-events. Everyone likes more easy speed.

Try riding an upright in a crosswind with a full fairing.

Herring! Who said anything about full fairing? Or any fairing that
impairs handling?

Quoted message said:

For that
matter, try riding one along the shoulder of a busy highway with
trucks popping 55mph+ gusts at you as they pass by.

Herring! I'll stick to non-busy non-freeway rides, like 99% of other
cyclists.

Quoted message said:

Speed is trumped
by what's possible in real circumstances. Full fairings on an upright
are for intense, controlled-conditions competition only.

Quoted message said:

A simple "bullet" under an aerobar might really give a nice boost (and
place to store water, food, spare/tool). Same with a compact "bulb"
behind the saddle---if a push-plate is included that might be something
helpful to shove against sometimes.

If you believe there is a real or potential demand for this, get the
investors lined up, devise the products, and take them to the proving
grounds of the market.

?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Then there's filling in the area between seat and dropouts to
streamline the rear wheel.

It's been done.

Links to stats?

Quoted message said:

From a speed standpoint, the effect is too small to
justify the weight.

Two sheets of carbon weigh...?

Quoted message said:

Such a shield is commonly employed to keep cargo
and kidlegs out of the spokes, though. My ancient Puch has one on
each side.

Different item. No relevance.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Maybe putting little shells around the
derailleurs. What about a faired pedal?

All that is generally achieved by such is an increase in weight and
frontal area, neither of which aids speed.

Stats?

I see that racers use smooth-top shoes today. The bottoms should be
smooth, too, including the pedal.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Could some kind of narrow fairing attached to the fork improve airflow
around legs?

Please try this. Let me know when and where, and I'll sell tickets.

Oh, I've done it. I'm just wondering about recent developments. People
are always fiddling with bike speed R&D.

When I made my test, I used heavy foam and was trying to make aero
panniers. They worked great. Anyone looking for speed alone would
simplify things. Someone out there has to be serious about touring AND
have carbon-molding skill, or an interest in learning. It's not too
tough. Here's a link to a graphic and my report:

http://www.outyourbackdoor.com/OYB8/bikes/bikeaerobag.html

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Any simple way to give a jersey a streamlined boost? (Maybe "batwings"
under the arms.)

Smooth and snug; wings *increase* frontal area, and are a bad idea.

No. I've seen info about jerseys that fair the arm to shoulder.

It seems as though racing has limited R&D in bike speed even though
statistically no one races. It has to be that less than 1% of fast
sport riding occurs in races. Riders could have fun with aero aides for
all that other riding. And science people could have fun testing.

Dear Jeff,

Here's an upright fairing from page 99 of the 1985 "Bicycling Science,
2nd edition," which shows Jack Campbell partly enclosed by a large,
simple, straight-up-and-down U-shaped sheet-metal fairing. The
U-shaped fairing is mounted on the handlebars and rises to armpit
height when on the drops and extends back to the hips.

http://www.filelodge.com/files/room19/497501/fairing.jpg

(Frankly, it looks a bit like something that a bicyclist planning a
trip through Iraq might cobble together as armor protection against
IED's.)

There are also tables on page 98 showing speed increases for the Glenn
Brown Zipper 2, the Van Valkenburgh Aeroshell, and the Kyle fairing.

Here's a picture of the "upright" Van Valkenburgh Aeroshell:

http://www.ihpva.org/HParchive/Kyle.htm

Google fails to find anything about the other upright fairings
mentioned twenty years ago in "Bicycling Science," which suggests how
practical they turned out to be.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

[email hidden] wrote:
[ ]

Quoted message said:

Dear Jeff,

Here's an upright fairing from page 99 of the 1985 "Bicycling Science,
2nd edition," which shows Jack Campbell partly enclosed by a large,
simple, straight-up-and-down U-shaped sheet-metal fairing. The
U-shaped fairing is mounted on the handlebars and rises to armpit
height when on the drops and extends back to the hips.

[ ]

Quoted message said:

Google fails to find anything about the other upright fairings
mentioned twenty years ago in "Bicycling Science," which suggests how
practical they turned out to be.

??

Says nothing about what could be done with current set-ups.

I'm wondering about more recent work.

Their design goals were different from today's. They were looking at
basic shapes as well as pure speed. Also, it was meant to be a basic
theory book. There's nothing about aerobars. And of course aero design
didn't even exist: those tests were done when only a few fairings
existed.

I saw a recent report about a decent gain coming from fairing the rear
triangle, for instance. Kyle has an extensive report about all the
USCF-legal gains one can add up---for 3 min's free speed in a 40km TT.
I'm interested in "illegal" gains that any recreational rider could
enjoy. These would be far easier to acquire.
http://damonrinard.com/aero/aerodynamics.htm.

My own research so far includes more current design elements than in
"Bicycle Science."
http://www.outyourbackdoor.com/OYB8/bikes/bikeaerobag.html

Someone out there has to have done more. Sport riders could gain.
Tourists could REALLY gain---so many out there with mountains of gear
on their mtbikes, out on the blasting headwind prairies.

--JP

"we want to make sure that a valuable resource like the past issues of
Human Power are available to anyone who is interested."
http://www.ihpva.org/HParchive/Kyle.htm
outstanding - there's goes March for reading

the fairing - like your kidneys, eyeballs and ottoliths on the
otherwise funfunfun 120mph gokart
there is no suspension ' ceptin the rubber and your butt
so see through fairings jiggle dura ace
even Ti fairings jiggle
van valkenburgh was using one hour drycleaning fairing?

Quoted message said:

I like to periodically check in on this topic.

What with all the aerobars, aeroframes and aerowheels out there, I'd
think that further streamlining and fairing would be developed for
upright bikes to whatever extent proved most effective.

The fretting about removing the cooling breeze is a red herring.

The worries about race rules are likewise lame---99% of riding is in
non-events. Everyone likes more easy speed.

A simple "bullet" under an aerobar might really give a nice boost (and
place to store water, food, spare/tool). Same with a compact "bulb"
behind the saddle---if a push-plate is included that might be something
helpful to shove against sometimes.

Then there's filling in the area between seat and dropouts to
streamline the rear wheel. Maybe putting little shells around the
derailleurs. What about a faired pedal?

Could some kind of narrow fairing attached to the fork improve airflow
around legs?

Any simple way to give a jersey a streamlined boost? (Maybe "batwings"
under the arms.)

I'd think that maybe a couple pounds of carbon add-ons could give a few
mph of free speed. Not bad.

At one time (maybe mid-1980s?) Specialized marketed "Tailwind"
panniers. In the top view, they had the approximate shape of a
truncated airfoil cross section. That is, the side closest to the
wheel was flat. The back was flat, as was the top and bottom. The
front of the pannier curved out then back to form the outside, in a
smooth curve. There were no external pockets to disturb the air flow.
Front and rear were similar, with the rear naturally larger. They were
advertised as allowing lower drag than a rider on an unloaded bike.

I have two sets, which we sometimes still use. I'm sure they did
reduce drag. On one tour, I rode with a man who weighed the same as I
did, and carried the same weight in panniers on bikes that were
identical but for size. He was shorter, therefore he'd be expected to
have less drag force. But he had ordinary panniers (Cannondale, IIRC)
and I had Tailwind. There was no doubt I outcoasted him every time.

(BTW, the mounting system for those panniers is pretty bad. Clevis
pins poke through holes to keep them in place. They're difficult to
remove, and they're prone to rattling.)

Another point: I use a handlebar bag on almost all my bikes.
Although most handlebar bags are aerodynamically "dirty," I wonder if
there might be a net gain by shielding part of my body from the force
of the wind. Again, I usually outcoast my peers on road rides.

I'll note, though, that aerodynamics is tricky, and sometimes
counterintuitive. That is, shapes that look better to us sometimes
look worse to the air molecules flying by. This is why wind tunnels
exist.

- Frank Krygowski

I've used Zzipper fairings
(http://www.zzipper.com/Products/prod_upright.html) and Tailwind panniers
(http://www.angletechcycles.com/accessories/techwind.htm) on my upright
bikes for 20-25 years.

The Winter 1990 issue of the journal Human Power published a coastdown study
I did. I compared three handlebar fairings, the Tailwind panniers, a rear
wheel cover, plus some small fairings I'd made from styrofoam and balsa for
the frame, seat, etc.

The results were that the handlebar fairings improved my speed 0.5-0.75 mph
around 20 mph, 1-2 mph around 30 mph, and 3-4 mph at 40 mph. These fairings
weighed 0.5 to 0.75 pounds.

Fitting the fairing is important: you want the fairing to fit as close to
you as possible, and to come up to your shoulders. From the side, the
fairing should center on the bowl of your lap, which is what catches the
wind. The Zzipper is usually mounted too low and too far forward to be
optimal.

The Tailwind front panniers increased my speed 0.25 mph around 20 mph. The
rear panniers (which are larger) didn't change my speed.

I forget what the wheel covers and other stuff did.

What I have on my commuting bike now is the Zzipper, Tailwind front and rear
panniers, and an Arundel aero water bottle
(http://www.excelsports.com/new.asp?page=8&description=Chrono+Aero+Carbon+Ca
ge+and+Bottle&vendorCode=ARUNDEL&major=3&minor=12). I recall a study in
Bicycling magazine around 1975 and another by Shimano in the early 1980s
finding the water bottles add surprising drag. Spending $60 on an aero water
bottle seems like a no-brainer.

Here's picture of my bike (without the aero water bottle):

http://www.casafuturatech.com/Personal/tricross-web.jpg

I don't notice that the fairing interferes with cooling in hot weather. At
25+ mph there's plenty of wind to cool me. In the winter the fairing is a
big plus.

When winds are gusting over 50 mph I take off the fairing (four wing nuts),
roll it up and stuff it in the panniers.

I get compliments on my bike every day. Lots of people say it's the coolest
bike they've ever seen, or ask where they can get one. The strange thing is,
these compliments are from casual cyclists. The "jersey pro" cyclists won't
give me the time of day. A good friend whom I run with every week is the
buyer for one of the largest bike websites. He bike commutes every day, is a
national champion racer, owns six bikes, etc. He knows bikes and he knows
what sells. I offered to let him borrow my bike for a week. He wasn't
interested. We had a long talk about it. Aerodynamics are pointless for
casual cyclists, who are happy to tool along on a mountain bike at 8 mph.
Just pumping up their tires would make them go faster, but they don't do
that. Casual cyclists are also very price-conscious. The owner of Zzip
Designs and I had a long talk. At $175 he can't get his fairings into bike
shops. A bike manufacturer was ready to buy 10,000 fairings, but they wanted
to pay something like $10 each!

The "jersey pros" won't use fairings because they want to look like their
pro racer heroes. The crazy thing is that they want to look like bike racers
even when they're on a recreational ride, or commuting to work! They refuse
to put panniers, fenders, lights, or fairings on their bikes. They carry
what they need in a backpack or a messenger bag. They drive to work if it's
raining. They endanger their lives riding at night without lights. They ride
slower because they won't use fairings.

"Pro" bikes are made so that you can't put on panniers, fenders, etc. I went
into a large bike shop last year and they had no bikes that could take front
panniers!

But there's a parallel universe, called recumbents. In that world (where
I've heard Al Gore is President), fairings are common accessories. Panniers,
lights, and fenders are seen on bikes that go fast. I've almost bought a
recumbent several times, and I'm sure I will some day, but this is getting
long so I won't go into all that.

My friend and I agree about something: we'd love to see more people get out
of their cars and bike to work. I suggested that his website sell bikes like
mine. No one makes such bikes. (Putting my bike together took months.) I
said that if fast commuting bikes were available, people would buy them. He
said that it'd take far too much resources to sell to a niche market. We
agreed that the only thing that will change this situation will be gas
prices going over $5/gallon.
--
Thomas David Kehoe
Work: http://www.casafuturatech.com
Not work: http://www.myspace.com/43380153

in article [email hidden],
[email hidden] at [email hidden] wrote on 6/14/06 10:39 AM:

Quoted message said:

I like to periodically check in on this topic.

What with all the aerobars, aeroframes and aerowheels out there, I'd
think that further streamlining and fairing would be developed for
upright bikes to whatever extent proved most effective.

The fretting about removing the cooling breeze is a red herring.

The worries about race rules are likewise lame---99% of riding is in
non-events. Everyone likes more easy speed.

A simple "bullet" under an aerobar might really give a nice boost (and
place to store water, food, spare/tool). Same with a compact "bulb"
behind the saddle---if a push-plate is included that might be something
helpful to shove against sometimes.

Then there's filling in the area between seat and dropouts to
streamline the rear wheel. Maybe putting little shells around the
derailleurs. What about a faired pedal?

Could some kind of narrow fairing attached to the fork improve airflow
around legs?

Any simple way to give a jersey a streamlined boost? (Maybe "batwings"
under the arms.)

I'd think that maybe a couple pounds of carbon add-ons could give a few
mph of free speed. Not bad.

--JP
allbikemag.com

Thomas David Kehoe said:

The results were that the handlebar fairings improved my speed 0.5-0.75 mph
around 20 mph, 1-2 mph around 30 mph, and 3-4 mph at 40 mph. These fairings
weighed 0.5 to 0.75 pounds.

Is a coastdown study a valid measurement of the value of a fairing
with a HP limited engine like a cyclist ? I'm no physicist (which I'm
about to prove, but I'd think the drag of the fairing would increase
the acceleration load, particularly, and repeatedly, in a headwind.
<snip>

Quoted message said:

Spending $60 on an aero water

Funny, I was thinking spending $60 on a water bottle might be a "no
using of your brainer". :-)

Quoted message said:

bottle seems like a no-brainer.

Quoted message said:

these compliments are from casual cyclists. The "jersey pro" cyclists won't
give me the time of day.

He,he,he, "jersey pro", I like it. I ride vintage bikes and I don't
wear spandex team colors - they never see me either.

Quoted message said:

We
agreed that the only thing that will change this situation will be gas
prices going over $5/gallon.

A pox on you!

On Thu, 15 Jun 2006 01:30:16 GMT, - Bob - <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Thomas David Kehoe said:

The results were that the handlebar fairings improved my speed 0.5-0.75 mph
around 20 mph, 1-2 mph around 30 mph, and 3-4 mph at 40 mph. These fairings
weighed 0.5 to 0.75 pounds.

Is a coastdown study a valid measurement of the value of a fairing
with a HP limited engine like a cyclist ? I'm no physicist (which I'm
about to prove, but I'd think the drag of the fairing would increase
the acceleration load, particularly, and repeatedly, in a headwind.

[snip]

Dear Bob,

The fairings reduce the wind drag, so the bikes will accelerate more
quickly for the same effort on the level. By 15 mph, wind drag
outweighs the other two drag forces combined (tire rolling resistance
and transmission power losses), which would show almost no detectable
difference due to the added weight.

The fairing's reduction in wind drag has considerably more effect on
acceleration than the tiny increase in weight, which only about as
much as a full water bottle.

That said, most upright riders are going to be closer to 20 mph and
0.5 mph speed increases, which may be why fairings are rarely seen on
uprights. After an hour at 20 mph, the fairing rider would be only
about half a mile and 90 seconds ahead of the unfaired rider.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

They drive to work if it's

Quoted message said:

raining. They endanger their lives riding at night without lights.

I've seen that alot. No lights, and it's early morning or dark. Don't
they know, no one gives a damn who they are, unless they run over them.
They ride with a big backpack, on commutes, like they're going backpacking,
instead of having an extra-big saddle bag. You tell me, what looks more
stupid. I've done backpacking, but I prefer not to do it on my bike. They
just don't want to be caught dead, with a rack, or a big loose hanging bag.
I think lights are cool, I think they are the most important items you can
put on your bike in the winter months. But you have to get the right ones,
alot of them are [censored].

Quoted message said:

I like to periodically check in on this topic.

What with all the aerobars, aeroframes and aerowheels out there, I'd
think that further streamlining and fairing would be developed for
upright bikes to whatever extent proved most effective.

Jeff-

Check with "Michigan Mike" Mowett. He came out to our races in Portland
a couple weeks back and did quite well. He rides an aero upright with
trispoke wheels, a front fairing, and a bodysock:
http://www.ohpv.org/albums/pir2006/day1/roadrace/pages/IMAG0055.htm

Other Jeff

In article <[email hidden]>,

() said:

I like to periodically check in on this topic.

What with all the aerobars, aeroframes and aerowheels out there, I'd
think that further streamlining and fairing would be developed for
upright bikes to whatever extent proved most effective.

The fretting about removing the cooling breeze is a red herring.

The worries about race rules are likewise lame---99% of riding is in
non-events. Everyone likes more easy speed.

A simple "bullet" under an aerobar might really give a nice boost (and
place to store water, food, spare/tool). Same with a compact "bulb"
behind the saddle---if a push-plate is included that might be something
helpful to shove against sometimes.

A front fairing used to be offered as an option on AM series Moultons -
IIRC it went from about front axle level to "top of the rider's head if
he was down on the drops"

Quoted message said:

Any simple way to give a jersey a streamlined boost? (Maybe "batwings"
under the arms.)

As reported in "The Times", February 12th 1998

'How cyclists can go like bat out of Hell

By Nick Nuttall, Technology Correspondent.

FORGET lycra shorts and aerodynamic helmets, cyclists wanting to boost
their speed can catch the wind with a pair of bat-style wings.

Pulled tight around the cyclist, the triangular wings streamline
headwinds sliding the air over the arms and down the pedaller's back,
according to the inventor. With a tail wind the cyclist merely unfurls
the wings like a ship's sail to harness the air flows from behind to
push him or her along.

The lightweight wings are anchored to the rider's midriff and kept tight
by cords attached to the cyclist's thumbs.

The idea is the brainchild of Robert Sabin of Long Island, New York who
has filed a world patent application at the Patent Office in Newport,
Gwent.

It describes the invention as a "garment for aerodynamic assistance of
the propulsion of a rider-propelled vehicle" intended for use by
"recreational, mountain, touring or racing bicyclists". Mr. Sabin says:
"The garment enhances the aerodynamic efficiency of the rider when
directed into head winds or against cross winds.

"And it provides thrust to propel the vehicle and rider, serving as
sails, in cross winds or tail winds." He points out that advances such
as aero-frames, streamlined helmets and tight-fitting skin suits had not
solved the problem of aerodynamic drag for the bicycle rider. Typically
the rider represented about 64 per cent of aerodynamic drag and the
bicycle a mere 21 per cent.'

Mr. Sabin's invention was also reported in New Scientist. He says: "An
advantage of the invention is that, under influence of certain
directions of the wind, the device provides a positive thrust to assist
the bicyclist in propelling the bicycle either to move at a faster pace
or to maintain a speed with less effort by the cyclist"

A rather rubbish copy of the original illustration from "The Times":

<URL:http://legslarry.8bit.co.uk/BikeStull/BatCape.jpg>

--
Dave Larrington - <http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/>
Me, I wanna be an anglepoise lamp, yeah!

As someone who's getting set-up for a long commute, I really like
these ideas, but I also have seen how they've worked out in the
motorcycle arena. It's taken a lot of time and engineering effort to
make slippery mcycles that do not have stability problems. Back in
the day there were many "full fairings" on the market, notably Vetter,
Wixom, and Windjammer. I never bought one, having been an
impoverished student.

My recollection is that they improved comfort, but reduced stability,
especially in crosswinds and headwinds at an angle. Problems included
wobbles, vibration, and even crashes. I don't recall anyone, even in
the '70s oil crisis, bragging about improved gas mileage. There
weren't many factory fairings back then. Many motorcycles today have
factory fairings, and I assume product reliability would require
stability to be maximized for fleet safety.

Now we engineers have access to airflow modelling software that, used
with wind tunnel testing, really accelerates the process of
aerodynamic engineering. But what bike companies, large or small,
have used such resources extensively without a major racing program?

Perhaps it's coming?

Ken Freeman

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I like to periodically check in on this topic.

What with all the aerobars, aeroframes and aerowheels out there, I'd
think that further streamlining and fairing would be developed for
upright bikes to whatever extent proved most effective.

The fretting about removing the cooling breeze is a red herring.

The worries about race rules are likewise lame---99% of riding is in
non-events. Everyone likes more easy speed.

A simple "bullet" under an aerobar might really give a nice boost
(and
place to store water, food, spare/tool). Same with a compact "bulb"
behind the saddle---if a push-plate is included that might be
something
helpful to shove against sometimes.

Then there's filling in the area between seat and dropouts to
streamline the rear wheel. Maybe putting little shells around the
derailleurs. What about a faired pedal?

Could some kind of narrow fairing attached to the fork improve
airflow
around legs?

Any simple way to give a jersey a streamlined boost? (Maybe
"batwings"
under the arms.)

I'd think that maybe a couple pounds of carbon add-ons could give a
few
mph of free speed. Not bad.

--JP
allbikemag.com

"Road Man" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

As someone who's getting set-up for a long commute, I really like
these ideas, but I also have seen how they've worked out in the
motorcycle arena. It's taken a lot of time and engineering effort to
make slippery mcycles that do not have stability problems. Back in
the day there were many "full fairings" on the market, notably Vetter,
Wixom, and Windjammer. I never bought one, having been an
impoverished student.

My recollection is that they improved comfort, but reduced stability,
especially in crosswinds and headwinds at an angle. Problems included
wobbles, vibration, and even crashes. I don't recall anyone, even in
the '70s oil crisis, bragging about improved gas mileage.

It was also about speed.

Adding a fairing to a Gitan increased the max speed from about 60 to over 70
mph. I'm rather bigger and heavier now, so these figures would probably be
smaller.

'Bents aren't the only parallel universe to "jersey pros." Rando bike
riders have been developing quality full-feature bikes for decades.
Moreover, the French rando style focuses on integrated design, in
contrast to the British "strap-on" style, in a way that could boost the
whole bike scene. More than just niche market people would go for bikes
that seamlessly and stylishly included all the generally useful
functions.

I still also think that if aero was properly included in the list of
obviously and generally desired functions---riders of any speed can
hugely benefit from far-easier riding into any headwind or
crosswind---that elegant and natural solutions could be developed which
include stability.

Mike Mowett's set-up to me seems incomplete and not necessarily
versatile in terms of result-goals, but he has fun with it. I think one
could reduce and stabilize the nosecone to harmonize much better with
an aero and possibly extend down a bit to shield legs, as I've
mentioned. An aero jersey could replace the bodysock. And he's doing
nothing with a saddle fairing / pushplate or rear-area fairing. But I'm
not sure that R&D is his thing. He's mostly out there having fun, which
is great.

The current top HPV records (81mph sprint, 50+mile-hour) were done with
Varnas, a no-tech-budget bike. No wind-tunnel.

Again, I'm surprised that the tinkering, workshop world of bikes hasn't
done anything with improving upright aero beyond the UCI regs which
statistically affect no riders. (The 1% of sport riders who race, and
only a small part of their weekly mileage, are an astonishing case of
the tail wagging the dog.)

I strongly remind folks that ultralight bikes didn't appear thanks to
UCI regs or trends! A regulated racing mentality brings ZERO bike
gains. The desire to go fast OUTSIDE of regs and strictures is what
brings the bike gains. (Training gains, however, do come from
racers---HRM, SRM, doping...)

Bikes and tech go together and have very low overhead costs compared to
the R&D of other sports, I suspect. Heck, I'm no techy and I've done
innovative research. So far my upright aero concepts are the most
advanced I've seen for real world application. That fellow's Tailwind
panniers and rather standard front windshield are nice but not
integrated or very optimized at all. It's great that he's using and
benefiting from them, but I think my R&D went quite a bit farther---not
to production utility, though. I'd love to see him using a shield
shaped to an aerobar and front hardshell aero pans with integrated
light/fender/rack!!!

I appreciate that weight has been determined to be hugely
important---bike R&D shows no limits here (with 7-10-lb raceable
uprights). Aero has also been determined to be hugely important---with
the only exploring being in the range of statistically irrelevant
UCI-tri-legal gimmicks. (Again, pro teams can do all that R&D on their
own. That leaves, what, a million sport riders riding millions of
NON-racing miles with ZERO exploration on their aero behalf.)
Thankfully, carbon/ti can solve both the concerns of weight and aero.
Let's just start applying it in light of other current innovation.

And let's include other features, too, while we're at it---stylish
integrated fenders (go with fairings easily), internal light wiring,
lights merge with fairings and carbon frames easily, hidden suspension,
cargo spaces within fairings. Remember, none of this has to appear very
obtrusive. The result would look no more outlandish than any of today's
other carbon Y-frame bikes---and would be far faster and far more
functional. An aero helmet could look cool, too. With good design/color
scheme the result could easily look LESS garish than many of today's
jersey pros.

--JP

PS: Bike markets are interesting things, hinted to here but very
incompletely. The performance sector is NOT a niche market but a huge
aspect of the bike market. Its customers WANT to pay the most, but they
are indeed addicted to fad/trends. The neighborhood bike market is also
big and, as stated, wants to pay nothing. There's plenty of room for
bike R&D here, though.

Worth noting is that "touring is the new black." It's getting ready to
boom. Integrated bikes will WIN here. There have been MANY recent gains
in touring but none of them are consolidated yet. Opportunity! (Mark my
words.) For instance, the ultralight scene in backpacking is starting
to influence bike touring. It will do so in a further BIG way, I
predict.

Someone wondered about bike stability: today's loaded tour bike is a
mess. Ungainly and suffers from all winds. A standard set of pans is
blown about every which way and slowed by anything. The ungainly and
rigidly harsh mtbike is the new beast of tour burden. Succeeding
despite lack of design. It won't be what the next tour boom relies on,
though. The aerobar and bar-end have both been godsends to tourists,
however, and are seen on most tour-rigs. Suspension is common, too, I
think.

Aeropanniers can be quite small, much faster, more stable, more
weatherly (hardshell keeps out rain easily) and much more secure. And a
small set of pans is all anyone will need with the new range of
ultralight tour equipment coming out (or now available).

Extra cost will be definitely seen as a good and cool thing to the
leading element of this new trend.

We just need to see someone show some further design leadership here.
And considering the image/appearance sensitivity of the (large)
high-end biking market one will have to make sure the end product looks
great and will have to make sure that leader-personalities in this
field are seen using it. (But there's another paradigm glitch: right
now the only star power that can have impact comes from sports. Still,
there's hope there: if an unsupported RAAM ever takes shape an
integrated/faired bike might be a winner.)

Unsupported yet organized touring might also take off. Right now sag
tours are the leader. But if an integrated-faired tourbike with all you
needed to camp weighed only 10 lbs more than today's bare bike---and
was faster to boot---it might start to be seen as a cool way to go.

Right now, offhand, it seems like the mtbike tour crowd is leading the
way in UL touring. Heavily loaded, wobbly touring is misery on a
singletrack trail. But their advances aren't optimized for road touring.

Quoted message said:

Again, I'm surprised that the tinkering, workshop world of bikes hasn't
done anything with improving upright aero beyond the UCI regs

But they have... The Moulton Liners still hold the upright world record
AIUI. See here... http://members.localnet.com/~milliken/liner/liners.htm

However, if you're going to work on an aerodynamically optimised bike it
makes a lot of sense to start with something that gives you a better
start! Since a lot of the work in aero is minimising frontal area then
that rather leads you to a recumbent.

One of the truly great things about the DF upright is it's very
versatile, does lots of jobs reasonably well and can easily be carried
and stored. Start adding integrated fairings etc. and this gets
destroyed to some extent.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

Dave Larrington said:

As reported in "The Times", February 12th 1998

'How cyclists can go like bat out of Hell

By Nick Nuttall, Technology Correspondent.

FORGET lycra shorts and aerodynamic helmets, cyclists wanting to boost
their speed can catch the wind with a pair of bat-style wings.

Pulled tight around the cyclist, the triangular wings streamline
headwinds sliding the air over the arms and down the pedaller's back,
according to the inventor. With a tail wind the cyclist merely unfurls
the wings like a ship's sail to harness the air flows from behind to
push him or her along.

[snip further wing advantages]

Dear Dave,

I'm afraid that the kind of thinking in the Times illustrates the
problem.

A rider who does less than 20 mph on a level road is unlikely to be
interested in wearing "wings" for their small aerodynamic advantages.

He'd need a steady 25 mph tailwind before he could hope to get a
useful "push" by spreading his wings at his normal speed--and it
wouldn't be much more of a push than he'd get just by sitting up and
riding hands-on-tops.

I'll leave detailed comments about how effectively a ship's sail
harnesses air flows from behind it to more nautical posters, but I
gather that a sail works far better as a wing than as billboard.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel