J
Just zis Guy, you know?
Guest
Bill "laa laa I'm not listening" Zaumen wrote:
> Guy is still putting out his baby talk. What a moron. I'll reply to
> the stuff below and put him back in his timeout for his other
> posts.
Translation: Bill still can't make it to the end of a sentence, and is still
in "laa laa I'm not listening" mode.
>> , as was stated multiple times, the only ANSI certified helmet
>> that increased drag by less than a full hea dof hair was unwearable.
> You may have stated that, but you didn't prove it.
No, I didn't have to, because the links you posted did that for me.
Evidently you didn't read them first - more fool you.
>>> The Bell V1 Pro was a typical helmet in the 1980s. We can do better
>>> today in terms of aerodynamics.
>> So you assert, but despite repeated promptings you have not produced
>> a single shred of evidence.
> Look at the shape of newer helmets.
As you are so fond of saying, repeating yuor ******** doesn't make it true.
We have seen reasons advanced why modern helmets would be worse than the V-1
(and that includes from someone who actually owns one), and you have
asserted that modern helmets are better, but actually you have posted no
evidence to supercede the figures from the Kyle study.
We do know that another study you linked says that helmets increase drag,
and the strongly pro-helmet BHSI say that helmets make drag worse and you
wouldn't want to wear the kind which doesn't.
> Filling in the gap behind a cyclist
> reduces air drag. In fact, if someone drafts you closely, you're air
> drag will drop although you'll still put out more effort than the guy
> behind you.
I suppose that one day you will stop trying to conflate the aerodynamics of
time trial helmets with those of standard helmets, but I'm not holding my
breath. Note: the Japanese study you linked showed that even the aero
helmets made things worse unless the head was held rigidly, the long tail of
the helmet pressed back against the neck, and the rider in an aero crouch.
When the rider sat up even slightly, the aero helmets performed markedly
worse than a bare head.
You wouldn't know that, of course, because you didn't read the study before
you posted the link.
> My helmet has less vents than the more extreme designs. It's kind of
> middle of the road.
So you say, but since you flatly refuse to tell us which helmet you wear we
can't know whether you are lying or just deluded.
Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington
University
> Guy is still putting out his baby talk. What a moron. I'll reply to
> the stuff below and put him back in his timeout for his other
> posts.
Translation: Bill still can't make it to the end of a sentence, and is still
in "laa laa I'm not listening" mode.
>> , as was stated multiple times, the only ANSI certified helmet
>> that increased drag by less than a full hea dof hair was unwearable.
> You may have stated that, but you didn't prove it.
No, I didn't have to, because the links you posted did that for me.
Evidently you didn't read them first - more fool you.
>>> The Bell V1 Pro was a typical helmet in the 1980s. We can do better
>>> today in terms of aerodynamics.
>> So you assert, but despite repeated promptings you have not produced
>> a single shred of evidence.
> Look at the shape of newer helmets.
As you are so fond of saying, repeating yuor ******** doesn't make it true.
We have seen reasons advanced why modern helmets would be worse than the V-1
(and that includes from someone who actually owns one), and you have
asserted that modern helmets are better, but actually you have posted no
evidence to supercede the figures from the Kyle study.
We do know that another study you linked says that helmets increase drag,
and the strongly pro-helmet BHSI say that helmets make drag worse and you
wouldn't want to wear the kind which doesn't.
> Filling in the gap behind a cyclist
> reduces air drag. In fact, if someone drafts you closely, you're air
> drag will drop although you'll still put out more effort than the guy
> behind you.
I suppose that one day you will stop trying to conflate the aerodynamics of
time trial helmets with those of standard helmets, but I'm not holding my
breath. Note: the Japanese study you linked showed that even the aero
helmets made things worse unless the head was held rigidly, the long tail of
the helmet pressed back against the neck, and the rider in an aero crouch.
When the rider sat up even slightly, the aero helmets performed markedly
worse than a bare head.
You wouldn't know that, of course, because you didn't read the study before
you posted the link.
> My helmet has less vents than the more extreme designs. It's kind of
> middle of the road.
So you say, but since you flatly refuse to tell us which helmet you wear we
can't know whether you are lying or just deluded.
Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington
University
