MIT on Aero

41 said:

-Water bottle on the seat tube is more aero than no water bottle on the
seat tube;

Interesting. At these speeds it's not unreasonable that a blunter
curve
could be more efficient than a sharper one (cf. the design of
submarines).

Will super-sized tubes be the next marketing push?

Quoted message said:

-WB on the down tube is worse than no water bottle;

The stream is already split by the wheel and tube there, so the
extra width is an added disturbance. This is different from
the previous case. It suggests that if you're going to split the
wind, go wide.

Are super-sized tires on the horizon?

Quoted message said:

-rider contribution to drag about 75-85%, bicycle roughly 15-25%. Not
much to work with for the bicycle.

They need to study body shape. Does having big arms and
wide lats help or hinder? (Ignoring that adding poundage to
everything below the navel would probably be the best thing).

Quoted message said:

They don't specify which aero or non-aero wheels, or which gloves or
helmets.

The gloves thing is interesting because it's conceivable that
full-fingered, form-fitting, slippery-fabric gloves would be better
than gloves with odd nooks, seams, and grabby fabrics. But
if the fat-tube theory holds sway, padding the bars and dumping
the gloves could be the way to go.

--Blair

Blair P. Houghton said:

The gloves thing is interesting because it's conceivable that
full-fingered, form-fitting, slippery-fabric gloves would be better
than gloves with odd nooks, seams, and grabby fabrics. But
if the fat-tube theory holds sway, padding the bars and dumping
the gloves could be the way to go.

I use gloves for two reasons. One of them is to keep my palms intact
if I take a spill. Sadly, padding on the bars won't do that.
--
Typoes are a feature, not a bug.
Some gardening required to reply via email.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

Blair P. Houghton said:

41 wrote:

Quoted message said:

Are super-sized tires on the horizon?

I dunno, but super-sized riders are definitely already here. I'm often
amazed at the width of people riding several-thousand dollar bicycles.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

-rider contribution to drag about 75-85%, bicycle roughly 15-25%. Not
much to work with for the bicycle.

They need to study body shape. Does having big arms and
wide lats help or hinder? (Ignoring that adding poundage to
everything below the navel would probably be the best thing).

I saw a guy just like that this past weekend... bowlegged on top of
that. I don't recall what model bicycle he had but remember thinking
$$$$$.

Blair P. Houghton said:

41 said:

-Water bottle on the seat tube is more aero than no water bottle on the
seat tube;

Interesting. At these speeds it's not unreasonable that a blunter
curve
could be more efficient than a sharper one (cf. the design of
submarines).

Will super-sized tubes be the next marketing push?

Quoted message said:

-WB on the down tube is worse than no water bottle;

The stream is already split by the wheel and tube there, so the
extra width is an added disturbance. This is different from
the previous case. It suggests that if you're going to split the
wind, go wide.

Are super-sized tires on the horizon?

Quoted message said:

-rider contribution to drag about 75-85%, bicycle roughly 15-25%. Not
much to work with for the bicycle.

They need to study body shape. Does having big arms and
wide lats help or hinder? (Ignoring that adding poundage to
everything below the navel would probably be the best thing).

Quoted message said:

They don't specify which aero or non-aero wheels, or which gloves or
helmets.

The gloves thing is interesting because it's conceivable that
full-fingered, form-fitting, slippery-fabric gloves would be better
than gloves with odd nooks, seams, and grabby fabrics. But
if the fat-tube theory holds sway, padding the bars and dumping
the gloves could be the way to go.

--Blair

Surely formfitted mittens are the way to go!

41 said:

Blair P. Houghton said:

41 wrote:

Quoted message said:

Are super-sized tires on the horizon?

I dunno, but super-sized riders are definitely already here. I'm often
amazed at the width of people riding several-thousand dollar bicycles.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

-rider contribution to drag about 75-85%, bicycle roughly 15-25%. Not
much to work with for the bicycle.

They need to study body shape. Does having big arms and
wide lats help or hinder? (Ignoring that adding poundage to
everything below the navel would probably be the best thing).

I saw a guy just like that this past weekend... bowlegged on top of
that. I don't recall what model bicycle he had but remember thinking
$$$$$.

The ones that amuse me are the guys in the full aero tuck on the tt bars
pedaling bow legged so they don't knee themselves in the gut.

Ron

PiledHIgher said:

Surely formfitted mittens are the way to go!

The full-body/bike mitten:

http://www.bicycleman.com/history/images/f40_race_lg.jpg

--Blair

41 said:

I dunno, but super-sized riders are definitely already here. I'm often
amazed at the width of people riding several-thousand dollar bicycles.

You seems to imply that "fat" people don't deserve to ride nice bikes.

Is that what you intended?

D'ohBoy

D'ohBoy said:

41 said:

I dunno, but super-sized riders are definitely already here. I'm often
amazed at the width of people riding several-thousand dollar bicycles.

You seems to imply that "fat" people don't deserve to ride nice bikes.

It's not that they don't deserve them. Just that it's a little pointless.

Better than taking up a crack habit as a way of enjoying discretionary income.
But at this level it's not the bike that makes you faster than the other guy.

Ron

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

Quoted message said:

D'ohBoy said:

41 said:

I dunno, but super-sized riders are definitely already here. I'm
often
amazed at the width of people riding several-thousand dollar
bicycles.

You seems to imply that "fat" people don't deserve to ride nice
bikes.

It's not that they don't deserve them. Just that it's a little
pointless.

Better than taking up a crack habit as a way of enjoying
discretionary income.
But at this level it's not the bike that makes you faster than the
other guy.

Ron

It's not in the least pointless. Do these guys (I might admit to some
minor physical resemblences if plied with beer or donuts ...) think
they're ready for masters' racing or RAAM this week? Probably not!
Could they be thinking about 40 mile club rides this year? Maybe so!
Could they be thinking, "I'm headed the way of my relatives who died
of obesity complications!" and hence want to do SOMETHING fun to
reverse the trends of their genetics, live, and culture? Sounds like
a positive motivation to me!

You don't need to be a greyhound to enjoy cycling. Could we all
sometimes be more judicious about fit and style choices?

BTW, I don't buy the idea that wider riders are generally more aero
than narrow riders. All other thinks being equal, frontal area is a
huge factor. However, they might not be equal.

Yours for beneficial and fun cycling,

Ken

41 said:

-rider contribution to drag about 75-85%, bicycle roughly 15-25%. Not
much to work with for the bicycle.

That's the last time I'll ride in drag, then.

Road Man said:

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

Quoted message said:

D'ohBoy said:

41 wrote:

> I dunno, but super-sized riders are definitely already here. I'm
> often
> amazed at the width of people riding several-thousand dollar
> bicycles.

You seems to imply that "fat" people don't deserve to ride nice
bikes.

It's not that they don't deserve them. Just that it's a little
pointless.

Better than taking up a crack habit as a way of enjoying
discretionary income.
But at this level it's not the bike that makes you faster than the
other guy.

Ron

It's not in the least pointless. Do these guys (I might admit to some
minor physical resemblences if plied with beer or donuts ...) think
they're ready for masters' racing or RAAM this week? Probably not!
Could they be thinking about 40 mile club rides this year? Maybe so!
Could they be thinking, "I'm headed the way of my relatives who died
of obesity complications!" and hence want to do SOMETHING fun to
reverse the trends of their genetics, live, and culture? Sounds like
a positive motivation to me!

Sure, but it doesnt' take carbon fiber to do that. That was the entirety of my
point unless it somehow struck a nerve. Parking lot at the paved loop at
Flatwoods park the other day found me surrounded by other fat old guys. If the
guy with the Six13 was gonna pass me on the trail it would've had nothing to do
with the difference between his state of the art bike and the Redline cross bike
with road tires I was riding. That's what I mean by relatively pointless.

Quoted message said:

You don't need to be a greyhound to enjoy cycling. Could we all
sometimes be more judicious about fit and style choices?

Agreed, but you do need to be somewhere under 15-20% body fat before you can
spend more than a couple thousand on a bike and have it make much sense. Like I
say, it is better than crack and if it weren't for guys buying guitars and amps
and stereos far beyond their ability to play or listen I'd be out of work. Still
I reserve the right to make fun of someone who's 35 pounds overweight and pays
$120 an ounce to remove weight from his bike.

Quoted message said:

BTW, I don't buy the idea that wider riders are generally more aero
than narrow riders. All other thinks being equal, frontal area is a
huge factor. However, they might not be equal.

Frontal area is a big deal. The wide bodies have more wind resistance, that's
all there is to it.

Quoted message said:

Yours for beneficial and fun cycling,

Enjoy.

Ron
(Borderline fat with far too much invested in bikes)

RonSonic a écrit :

Quoted message said:

Road Man said:

You don't need to be a greyhound to enjoy cycling. Could we all
sometimes be more judicious about fit and style choices?

Agreed, but you do need to be somewhere under 15-20% body fat before you can
spend more than a couple thousand on a bike and have it make much sense.

Make sense !?!? Why does it need to make sense ? How drab a world we
would live in, if everything had to make sense.

And how do you estimate the appropriate starting level ? Plumbing pipe
for newcomers, and then you take tests, and get graded, and are then
allowed to move up ?

Economics also plays a part. If someone has the cash to drop, what's
his sin ? If that same person makes enormous progress in a year or two,
and at that point "deserves" to have a better bike, will you castigate
him for wasting the old bike ?

When I raced during and just after university, I didn't have a great
bike at all. I didn't have the cash. I didn't go after sponsorship by
a club. And in the last 20 or so years, having nice bikes, but no
longer the same capacity, I don't feel ashamed in the least. I even
know more about how to use them, and I get more out of them.

That first was a 5-speed rear, used, ugly, chipped. The new ones (yes,
plural, currently) are 9 and 10V, are as close to perfect as I will ever
need, and they make me very happy. I don't plan on making sense of my
hobbies, ever.

--

Bonne route !

Sandy
Verneuil-sur-Seine FR

Sandy said:

RonSonic a écrit :

Quoted message said:

On Sat, 5 Aug 2006 08:30:53 -0400, "Road Man" <[email hidden]>wrote:

Quoted message said:

You don't need to be a greyhound to enjoy cycling. Could we all
sometimes be more judicious about fit and style choices?

Agreed, but you do need to be somewhere under 15-20% body fat before you can
spend more than a couple thousand on a bike and have it make much sense.

Make sense !?!? Why does it need to make sense ? How drab a world we
would live in, if everything had to make sense.

And how do you estimate the appropriate starting level ? Plumbing pipe
for newcomers, and then you take tests, and get graded, and are then
allowed to move up ?

Economics also plays a part. If someone has the cash to drop, what's
his sin ? If that same person makes enormous progress in a year or two,
and at that point "deserves" to have a better bike, will you castigate
him for wasting the old bike ?

When I raced during and just after university, I didn't have a great
bike at all. I didn't have the cash. I didn't go after sponsorship by
a club. And in the last 20 or so years, having nice bikes, but no
longer the same capacity, I don't feel ashamed in the least. I even
know more about how to use them, and I get more out of them.

That first was a 5-speed rear, used, ugly, chipped. The new ones (yes,
plural, currently) are 9 and 10V, are as close to perfect as I will ever
need, and they make me very happy. I don't plan on making sense of my
hobbies, ever.

--

Bonne route !

Sandy
Verneuil-sur-Seine FR

I think his point is that he has the right to make fun of somebody that
is overwieght and spends lots to reduce the weight of his bicycle...and
he has the right to say that it makes no sense...that doesn't have to
make sense to you, ya know.

Quoted message said:

41 wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

-rider contribution to drag about 75-85%, bicycle roughly 15-25%. Not
much to work with for the bicycle.

Quoted message said:

That's the last time I'll ride in drag, then.

That's not what your track record says.

<eg>

Road Man said:

You don't need to be a greyhound to enjoy cycling.

Dear Ken,

Yes, dalmatians also enjoy cycling.

Play the "Man's Best Friend" video at the bottom of this page:

http://funnybicycles.50webs.com/images1.html

The part where the rider carefully clips in is instructive.

Woof!

Carl Fogel

Sandy said:

RonSonic a écrit :

Quoted message said:

Road Man said:

You don't need to be a greyhound to enjoy cycling. Could we all
sometimes be more judicious about fit and style choices?

Agreed, but you do need to be somewhere under 15-20% body fat before you can
spend more than a couple thousand on a bike and have it make much sense.

Make sense !?!? Why does it need to make sense ? How drab a world we
would live in, if everything had to make sense.

And how do you estimate the appropriate starting level ? Plumbing pipe
for newcomers, and then you take tests, and get graded, and are then
allowed to move up ?

Economics also plays a part. If someone has the cash to drop, what's
his sin ? If that same person makes enormous progress in a year or two,
and at that point "deserves" to have a better bike, will you castigate
him for wasting the old bike ?

When I raced during and just after university, I didn't have a great
bike at all. I didn't have the cash. I didn't go after sponsorship by
a club. And in the last 20 or so years, having nice bikes, but no
longer the same capacity, I don't feel ashamed in the least. I even
know more about how to use them, and I get more out of them.

That's the ironic thing about stuff like this. I've got more and better gear
than when I played music for a living and we all have better bikes than when we
were young, lean and fast.

Quoted message said:

That first was a 5-speed rear, used, ugly, chipped. The new ones (yes,
plural, currently) are 9 and 10V, are as close to perfect as I will ever
need, and they make me very happy. I don't plan on making sense of my
hobbies, ever.

Enjoy your bikes, that's what they're for. But if you spend $4500 for a bike you
ride in a park for an hour at a time twice a week, I'll consider it a waste.
Even if I do the same thing.

Ron