Australian Cycling Forums - Bicycles Network Australia

Ha ha very funny. I was actually on my side (not my back).

thanks for the great thread fellas


krank

A serious question, once a crosswind goes past 90 degrees, does a deeper wheel start to act like a sail and give a significant benefit over a lighter non aero wheel?

Magnum9 wrote:A serious question, once a crosswind goes past 90 degrees, does a deeper wheel start to act like a sail and give a significant benefit over a lighter non aero wheel?

Wheels certainly have variable Cd with yaw and there is some funky stuff that goes on, for example, see this video and explain how the disk creates a forward thrust:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7dxhNQj66YU" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Alex Simmons/RST wrote:I think it's time you published your models. The gallery awaits.

Unstable aerodynamics? What exactly do you mean by this? Be precise in your definition.

Steering torque? Seriously? If you have trouble steering a wheel due to steering torque variances in wheels that are commercially available, then I'm afraid you have much bigger problems.

rubbish....every Joe is buying aero wheels these days, and struggles with them in gusty moderate winds...including in races. Most quickly learn there's a threshold they should be ridden in if they don't want to sacrifice bike control.

The more you post in this thread, the more you qualify your original absolutes Alex.
Regarding your TT example above, well hello....of course cross winds and gusts matter in the real world.

Now can you explain how your blog post charts determine when a particular depth aero rim will outperform a non aero lighter weight wheel, for a particular wind environment. Because this is what the thread has always been about. You made absolutist statements that aero always outweighs weight.... Of course, your charts cannot do that as you haven't accounted for the things I mentioned earlier.

And I don't need to be more precise with my definitions, because they're ENVE's. If all wheel manufacturers had relied on your original absolutes and blog charts Alex, aero wheels would be less evolved. If you think you've got a superior grasp on aerodynamics, get into the wheel manufacturing business.

meanwhile, keep mollifying and qualifying

In accordance with tradition...

I am still going for the adjectives, I think this character has gone past the normal descriptions.
Champion in his field on this board at least.
Still can't come up with any data or counter argument but can't find it in himself to be quiet in the absence of the above either.

Vexatious.

twizzle wrote:Vexatious.

- adjective
1.
causing vexation; troublesome; annoying: a vexatious situation.
2.
Law. (of legal actions) instituted without sufficient grounds and serving only to cause annoyance to the defendant.
3.
disorderly; confused; troubled.



Nice

Nice

warthog1 wrote:

twizzle wrote:Vexatious.

- adjective
1.
causing vexation; troublesome; annoying: a vexatious situation.
2.
Law. (of legal actions) instituted without sufficient grounds and serving only to cause annoyance to the defendant.
3.
disorderly; confused; troubled.

I am still chuckling about steering torque

winstonw wrote:
The more you post in this thread, the more you qualify your original absolutes Alex.
Regarding your TT example above, well hello....of course cross winds and gusts matter in the real world.

Cross winds and gust that have a detrimental effect on aero wheels are fairly well outside of the norm in any race that I have every participated in. Even the worst course that I have ever ridden in I would still go out in 50mm plus wheels. The short amount of time and effort in managing this fact was far outweighed by the benefits

jcjordan wrote:
Cross winds and gust that have a detrimental effect on aero wheels are fairly well outside of the norm in any race that I have every participated in. Even the worst course that I have ever ridden in I would still go out in 50mm plus wheels. The short amount of time and effort in managing this fact was far outweighed by the benefits

+1
I've got 85mm tubulars front and rear. It's them or alloy clinchers, that are not particularly light or aero. I've ridden them in some gusty conditions but have never had to swap them out. They are much faster than the low clinchers. I'd rather concentrate a bit more than pop or have nothing left at the end on the clinchers.

I wish I wasn't concerned about a divorce if I was to start testing 50-80mm deep wheels LOL

winstonw wrote:rubbish....every Joe is buying aero wheels these days, and struggles with them in gusty moderate winds...including in races. Most quickly learn there's a threshold they should be ridden in if they don't want to sacrifice bike control.

I don't see every Joe buying aero wheels. Must be special where you live. If you can't ride them properly, perhaps you could use some coaching

winstonw wrote:The more you post in this thread, the more you qualify your original absolutes Alex.

And what absolute would that be? Go back a read what I wrote, not what fantasy strawman exists in your head about what I wrote.

winstonw wrote:You made absolutist statements that aero always outweighs weight....

No, I didn't. But perhaps reading comprehension is a problem for you?

winstonw wrote:And I don't need to be more precise with my definitions, because they're ENVE's. If all wheel manufacturers had relied on your original absolutes and blog charts Alex, aero wheels would be less evolved. If you think you've got a superior grasp on aerodynamics, get into the wheel manufacturing business.

Ah, so it's OK to be vague and ambiguous because someone else is. Right, got it.

I have no interest in getting into the wheel manufacturing business, and why on earth would I suggest any wheel manufacturer rely on a couple of charts pertaining to a particular scenario? Please do your yourself a favour and learn about logical fallacies because you introduce them at every turn.

winstonw wrote:meanwhile, keep mollifying and qualifying

TLL resurrected the doping thread, and there was winston getting upset because his simplified model of grading using FTP power was being pee'd on by everyone as overly simplistic and unworkable - it needed Cda, mechanical drag, rider mean-maximal power profiles etc. to feed into a reliable model, and how do you measure when people will sandbag?

Switch to this thread and you get the exact opposite - trying to take a simple concept (aero is more important than weight) and make it overly complex by insisting on an onerously complex analysis. Winston must have thirty or so sets of wheels and wants something to calculate which set matches the predicted terrain, weather conditions, profile of the riders he will be with and the power profile he is intending to use when riding.

warthog1 wrote:

jcjordan wrote:
Cross winds and gust that have a detrimental effect on aero wheels are fairly well outside of the norm in any race that I have every participated in. Even the worst course that I have ever ridden in I would still go out in 50mm plus wheels. The short amount of time and effort in managing this fact was far outweighed by the benefits

+1
If got 85mm tubulars front and rear. It's them or alloy clinchers, that are not particularly light or aero. I've ridden them in some gusty conditions but have never had to swap them out. They are much faster than the low clinchers. I'd rather concentrate a bit more than pop or have nothing left at the end on the clinchers.

I've ridden 50 and 65mm carbon clinchers in some fairly gusty conditions. I think you just get used to it and deal with it. There are a few times when you'll have interesting moments when the wind really kicks up, but that's inevitable and it probably happens to everyone at some stage.

Those wheels are damn fast - but for the most part I'll just use normal alloy wheels. Unless you are racing, there is no point in using the really good wheels - unless you want bragging rights at the coffee shop, and then you'd better be the sort who does those wheels some justice, unless you want to incur the unfortunate disparaging comments.

I won't get into the physics and mechanics of it all, I'm no Adrian Newey, John Barnard or Norbert Singer - and never will be. I'll happily leave the wind-tunnel black-magic to others.

g-boaf wrote:

warthog1 wrote:

jcjordan wrote:
Cross winds and gust that have a detrimental effect on aero wheels are fairly well outside of the norm in any race that I have every participated in. Even the worst course that I have ever ridden in I would still go out in 50mm plus wheels. The short amount of time and effort in managing this fact was far outweighed by the benefits

+1
If got 85mm tubulars front and rear. It's them or alloy clinchers, that are not particularly light or aero. I've ridden them in some gusty conditions but have never had to swap them out. They are much faster than the low clinchers. I'd rather concentrate a bit more than pop or have nothing left at the end on the clinchers.

I've ridden 50 and 65mm carbon clinchers in some fairly gusty conditions. I think you just get used to it and deal with it. There are a few times when you'll have interesting moments when the wind really kicks up, but that's inevitable and it probably happens to everyone at some stage.

Those wheels are damn fast - but for the most part I'll just use normal alloy wheels. Unless you are racing, there is no point in using the really good wheels.

I only use the 85mm tubulars for racing but if I had some 50 mm clinchers I'd happily use them in some of the bunch rides here. Only because I'm riding with others whose ability far exceeds my own

but hey it helps the strava segments hanging off the back

I've got 44mm deep Pro-Lite Gavia clinchers on me roadie and 20something Weinmann clinchers on me commuter and I can't feel any difference uphill or down. Is it 'cos I'm fat and slow or I'm using the wrong modelling software?

I'd like to see if I can replicate these results in a vacuum but Dyson tells me it will invalidate the warranty

Dunno, but I can't tell either unless I'm riding with others who are pushing me. Which is more and more these days. :(The deep wheels def make it easier to keep up and recover.


The dyson is probably one vacuum where it would work. No bag, no loss of suction. They are really good, even deal with sanded plaster which clogs most IME.

warthog1 wrote:
I only use the 85mm tubulars for racing but if I had some 50 mm clinchers I'd happily use them in some of the bunch rides here. Only because I'm riding with others whose ability far exceeds my own

but hey it helps the strava segments hanging off the back

they encourage you to work harder to do them justice. 50s are pretty good all round actually. But you can't use them all the time, they are a bit costly for that and overkill for anything but racing. That means I have to get into racing too.

Mulger bill wrote: Is it 'cos I'm fat and slow or I'm using the wrong modelling software?

That Tom Compton site definitely implied that you are only talking about a difference of 50m over 5 kilometres... if you aren't fighting for placing, then it might not be noticeable. The thing is though, human endeavour is about the last 1%. I can lift 20kg bags all day, but you put a 25kg bag on my shoulder and it's like a boulder. I can ride at 32kmh easy, but 34 is chewing my anerobic system. HARD.

If you're interested in the poofteenth of a fraction of a bee's hind leg, it's going to help. Worth as much as a new bike? I dunno

Mulger bill wrote:I've got 44mm deep Pro-Lite Gavia clinchers on me roadie and 20something Weinmann clinchers on me commuter and I can't feel any difference uphill or down. Is it 'cos I'm fat and slow or I'm using the wrong modelling software?

I'd like to see if I can replicate these results in a vacuum but Dyson tells me it will invalidate the warranty

because your modelling software is fat slow and old.

TDC wrote:...because your modelling software is fat slow and old.

And it won't happen to your modeling software eventually?

Nobody wrote:

TDC wrote:...because your modelling software is fat slow and old.

And it won't happen to your modeling software eventually?

Ha...mine has always been that way! Anyway the argument is irrelevant to me as I don't race or use strava. I just dig riding my bike.

edit: i forgot the smiley on the original post to MB. I was joking.

So with all of us using deepish wheels.... who has an Giro Air Attack helmet?... 3 or 4 meters difference in a 30 sec sprint ... well ordered one at least!