Old 09-22-20, 03:22 PM
  #176  
badger1
Senior Member
 
badger1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Southwestern Ontario
Posts: 5,126
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1581 Post(s)
Liked 1,189 Times in 605 Posts
Originally Posted by livedarklions
Not the same thing, but I used to do plenty of long rides on my FX 3 (125-168 miles in a day). I don't find the aero aspect of it makes much difference even at 20 mph, it's more noticeable in limiting the top speeds than it is in wearing me out at normal cruising speeds. I also think it makes up for any fatigue factor in fighting aero forces by being a posture that's slightly easier to maintain and, for me, being a better set up to climb hills. My real reasons for switching to drop bars is because it's a little bit easier on the hands and I really enjoy squeezing out that extra 1-2 mph at the top end of the range on the flats.

Aero generally isn't really that effective against headwinds for the simple reason that they usually are at least slightly perpendicular to the direction your heading--i.e., also a bit of a crosswind. We're streamlined for the air hitting us directly in the face, not the one hitting you in the cheek..
I'm a dedicated flat-earth bar cyclist (580mm bars/minimal sweep/bar ends), but your post makes perfect sense. I don't ride the distances or speeds you do, but I do like climbing, and do a lot of it.

FWIW, Cycling+ did a comparo some years back (Feb/2014) between 'endurance' and 'flat-bar' road bikes over a 50 mile 'sportive' course -- one that included the Boxhill climb from the London Olympics. Their results were, they found, quite interesting, and confirmed part of your post above: "a better set up to climb hills".
badger1 is offline  
Likes For badger1: