What say you? New bike: Aero vs. Lightweight
08-03-19, 09:28 AM
#52
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Alpharetta, GA
Posts: 15,280
Bikes: Nashbar Road
Mentioned: 71 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2934 Post(s)
Liked 341 Times
in
228 Posts
Anyway, I'm torn between whether it makes more sense for me to get a lightweight bike or something more aero.
I'm an analytical guy first and for performance for most riders, and most of the riding they do, incremental improvements in aero have more impact than incremental improvements in weight.
Reality check: given the demand for both lightweight bikes and aero bikes (if not both), there are at least good subjective reasons to prefer either. There will be differences in handling, in "feel", which is the top factor for some people.
Or does it even matter?
The frame is a very small portion of the overall aerodynamic drag, Differences in frame weight, also very small. I'd look at it as a matter of taste and personal predilection whether you'd be concerned about either one.
I'm an analytical guy first and for performance for most riders, and most of the riding they do, incremental improvements in aero have more impact than incremental improvements in weight.
Reality check: given the demand for both lightweight bikes and aero bikes (if not both), there are at least good subjective reasons to prefer either. There will be differences in handling, in "feel", which is the top factor for some people.
Or does it even matter?
The frame is a very small portion of the overall aerodynamic drag, Differences in frame weight, also very small. I'd look at it as a matter of taste and personal predilection whether you'd be concerned about either one.
08-03-19, 12:53 PM
#53
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Music City, USA
Posts: 4,444
Bikes: bikes
Mentioned: 52 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2622 Post(s)
Liked 1,429 Times
in
711 Posts
The comment was "up over 17-18 mph or so". Nothing special, it's what I recall from the early days of aero bar use when triathletes were starting to use the clip-on variations on standard road bikes as an attempt to gain some free speed without investing in a dedicated TT bike. It seemed common experiences were the faster you tried to go, the more you fought the wind and that speed area seemed to be the point were a clip-on was going to be advantageous, below that not so much. Much has changed in the ensuing 25 years to modify this "theory".
08-03-19, 05:38 PM
#54
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: South shore, L.I., NY
Posts: 6,872
Bikes: Flyxii FR322, Cannondale Topstone, Miyata City Liner, Specialized Chisel, Specialized Epic Evo
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3230 Post(s)
Liked 2,079 Times
in
1,177 Posts
08-04-19, 05:50 AM
#55
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Huntington Beach, CA
Posts: 7,085
Bikes: Cervelo Prodigy
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 478 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 87 Times
in
67 Posts
08-05-19, 11:50 AM
#56
Junior Member
Wind drag comes almost completely from the rider; your clothes, helmet, and position on the bike. Wheels also play a real role, but keep in mind a deep rim on a front wheel can create handling issues at speed in a cross wind. "Aero" frames are 99% aesthetics and marketing hype. Tests showing they have any significant benefit are usually done in a wind tunnel with no rider on the bike and the wheels not spinning. Light bikes are fun, heavy bikes are not, according to my opinion. I'd say, for the highest fun/speed quotient, get a light bike that fits you, with great wheels and quality tires, buy light pedals and shoes, and bend your elbows ; )
08-05-19, 01:07 PM
#57
Senior Member
The logic here astounds me. Whether the majority of frame tests are done in a wind tunnel or through field testing is open for debate, but let's assume for the sake of argument that the vast majority of test are done in the wind tunnel. So what? If the tests done in the field contradicted the wind tunnel results, there might be a reason to mention where a test was conducted, but since field tests overwhelmingly confirm the results from tunnel testing, what difference does it make?
08-05-19, 01:08 PM
#58
Senior Member
08-05-19, 04:10 PM
#59
Junior Member
The logic here astounds me. Whether the majority of frame tests are done in a wind tunnel or through field testing is open for debate, but let's assume for the sake of argument that the vast majority of test are done in the wind tunnel. So what? If the tests done in the field contradicted the wind tunnel results, there might be a reason to mention where a test was conducted, but since field tests overwhelmingly confirm the results from tunnel testing, what difference does it make?
My point is that the flow of air around a bike is completely different when measured with and without a pedaling cyclist with spinning wheels. Without a rider, the difference in the drag coefficient of an "aero" and "non aero" frame might be significant. Add a pedaling rider with spinning wheels, and the frame becomes a non-issue. The air is disturbed in a completely different way.
08-05-19, 04:14 PM
#60
Senior Member
My point is that the flow of air around a bike is completely different when measured with and without a pedaling cyclist with spinning wheels. Without a rider, the difference in the drag coefficient of an "aero" and "non aero" frame might be significant. Add a pedaling rider with spinning wheels, and the frame becomes a non-issue. The air is disturbed in a completely different way.
08-05-19, 04:15 PM
#61
Senior Member
Differences in frame aero tend to become less significant with a pedaling rider versus a bike by itself, but they don't disappear, especially as the front of the bike is still in clean air.
08-05-19, 04:18 PM
#62
Newbie
BTW, I'd be surprised if your Madone came in at the weight of my 15.3 lb Emonda. (but maybe?)
Last edited by Dingman; 08-05-19 at 04:24 PM.
08-05-19, 04:28 PM
#63
Senior Member
Depending on which Domane he has it's quite possible, since the new SL5 comes in at 21+ lbs, and Madones are easily in the 18lbs range.
08-05-19, 04:45 PM
#64
Senior Member
You can't make a comparison unless you know the particular models. "Emonda" can mean one of those 11-pound SLR 10s from a few years ago, or it can mean a 21-pound ALR 4 Disc. Similar variation exists across the other Trek road lines.
08-05-19, 06:05 PM
#66
Newbie
My 2018 Domane comes in at about 18.5 with pedals. Oh wait, I put aerobars on - I'm sure it is pushing 20 lbs by now - without any fenders! And it's a 50cm frame. I got nothing special going on here.
08-06-19, 11:15 AM
#67
Junior Member
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 13
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
Hey everyone,
I'm currently in the market for a new bike for various reasons. I don't dislike the bike I have (2014 Cannondale SuperSix Evo 105), but I want to upgrade and have been saving up for awhile. Getting a good new bike instead of spending on new wheels and new groupset just seems to make sense, especially since I'm not too fond of my paint job.
Anyway, I'm torn between whether it makes more sense for me to get a lightweight bike or something more aero. Or does it even matter? I know that GCN has covered the topic and there have been countless of other places that have, as well, but I'd like a little more advice.
I live in Wisconsin. Some of my rides cover parts of the Ironman course we host, which is said to be one of the tougher ones.
More about my rides: I'm trying to get back into top shape, but typically around 30-50 miles. Right now my standard routes are covering about 1000-1500 feet of elevation gain according to Strava, and I typically average around 18-18.3 mph. When I have more time and can get further west, we're talking 1000-3000 feet of elevation gain. Mostly short, steepish hills, with some longer ones out there.
Should also note that I usually ride solo, occasionally in groups. Also sometimes do sportives. I don't race, but like to push myself to go as fast as possible/act like I'm competing.
So, what would you do if you were me: go lightweight or more aero? Does it even matter? I'm currently eyeing either a 2019 Argon 18 Gallium Disc or 2019 Orbea Orca Aero. I'm open to other suggestions, but I'm not overly fond of Trek and Specialized, which are the big sellers around here.
Just looking for input/advice. Thanks in advance!
I'm currently in the market for a new bike for various reasons. I don't dislike the bike I have (2014 Cannondale SuperSix Evo 105), but I want to upgrade and have been saving up for awhile. Getting a good new bike instead of spending on new wheels and new groupset just seems to make sense, especially since I'm not too fond of my paint job.
Anyway, I'm torn between whether it makes more sense for me to get a lightweight bike or something more aero. Or does it even matter? I know that GCN has covered the topic and there have been countless of other places that have, as well, but I'd like a little more advice.
I live in Wisconsin. Some of my rides cover parts of the Ironman course we host, which is said to be one of the tougher ones.
More about my rides: I'm trying to get back into top shape, but typically around 30-50 miles. Right now my standard routes are covering about 1000-1500 feet of elevation gain according to Strava, and I typically average around 18-18.3 mph. When I have more time and can get further west, we're talking 1000-3000 feet of elevation gain. Mostly short, steepish hills, with some longer ones out there.
Should also note that I usually ride solo, occasionally in groups. Also sometimes do sportives. I don't race, but like to push myself to go as fast as possible/act like I'm competing.
So, what would you do if you were me: go lightweight or more aero? Does it even matter? I'm currently eyeing either a 2019 Argon 18 Gallium Disc or 2019 Orbea Orca Aero. I'm open to other suggestions, but I'm not overly fond of Trek and Specialized, which are the big sellers around here.
Just looking for input/advice. Thanks in advance!
08-06-19, 11:55 AM
#68
Senior Member
I did close to 10 hours of hard pack riding last week. I was in over my head with this crowd, so I spent almost all of the time sheltered from the wind. Wheel sucking- I know, sorry.
So out of 10 hours of riding, possibly 5 minutes was in a situation where aero was important.
Light wheels were far more critical in hanging with the pack; the accelerations around the corners were the ones that hurt.
Ideal bike here: as light as possible with low profile carbon tubulars. Weight trumps aero.
So out of 10 hours of riding, possibly 5 minutes was in a situation where aero was important.
Light wheels were far more critical in hanging with the pack; the accelerations around the corners were the ones that hurt.
Ideal bike here: as light as possible with low profile carbon tubulars. Weight trumps aero.
08-06-19, 12:40 PM
#69
Senior Member
I did close to 10 hours of hard pack riding last week. I was in over my head with this crowd, so I spent almost all of the time sheltered from the wind. Wheel sucking- I know, sorry.
So out of 10 hours of riding, possibly 5 minutes was in a situation where aero was important.
Light wheels were far more critical in hanging with the pack; the accelerations around the corners were the ones that hurt.
Ideal bike here: as light as possible with low profile carbon tubulars. Weight trumps aero.
So out of 10 hours of riding, possibly 5 minutes was in a situation where aero was important.
Light wheels were far more critical in hanging with the pack; the accelerations around the corners were the ones that hurt.
Ideal bike here: as light as possible with low profile carbon tubulars. Weight trumps aero.
08-06-19, 01:44 PM
#70
Senior Member
And it wasn't accelerating the wheels that hurt. It was the weight on top of the saddle. (and accelerating against the drag force holding you back.) Despite all claims to the contrary, there isn't a special branch of physics that applies only to cyclists.
08-06-19, 01:54 PM
#71
Senior Member
Thanks for completely changing my mind. Invaluable quantitative evidence and real-world experience all in one brief issuance.
One more point: due to the UCI weight limit, top-end bikes are being loaded with extra ballast such as aero frame shapes, deep profile rims and (shudder) disk breaks.
But nobody here wasting their time on these forums is subject to this arbitrary limit. So significant performance gains are possible by not following this latest aero frame fad.
What's next: aero gravel bikes?
One more point: due to the UCI weight limit, top-end bikes are being loaded with extra ballast such as aero frame shapes, deep profile rims and (shudder) disk breaks.
But nobody here wasting their time on these forums is subject to this arbitrary limit. So significant performance gains are possible by not following this latest aero frame fad.
What's next: aero gravel bikes?
08-06-19, 02:16 PM
#73
Senior Member
Both light and aero...from the past.
I was out riding yesterday and meet a fellow who bought and old (17 years he says) Giant aluminum aero frame bike for $300. Sounded like it needed wheel bearing and headset work. When I lifted it up I could not believe how light this bike is. It felt like 15 - 17 lbs with the 25mm Shimano 16 spoke aero rims (might have been after market) and some accessories. Perhaps some bike manufactures have increased the weight of their aluminum bikes to promote their more profitable carbon fibre ones. I've never heard of a carbon aero bike this light.
This is one bike I think would be worth rebuilding.....Years ahead of it's time.
I was out riding yesterday and meet a fellow who bought and old (17 years he says) Giant aluminum aero frame bike for $300. Sounded like it needed wheel bearing and headset work. When I lifted it up I could not believe how light this bike is. It felt like 15 - 17 lbs with the 25mm Shimano 16 spoke aero rims (might have been after market) and some accessories. Perhaps some bike manufactures have increased the weight of their aluminum bikes to promote their more profitable carbon fibre ones. I've never heard of a carbon aero bike this light.
This is one bike I think would be worth rebuilding.....Years ahead of it's time.
Last edited by xroadcharlie; 08-06-19 at 02:23 PM.
08-06-19, 02:55 PM
#74
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2019
Posts: 48
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times
in
5 Posts
I actually swung by the shop, as I was just passing by, and looked at some Cervelo's as well.
I haven't made a decision yet, but I'm leaning towards the Orca Aero. They have a 2019 model at a price that is simply fantastic and in the color I'd like it in. I just need to take it for a ride and determine if the 57 is the proper size for me or the 60 is (in which case I'd have to look elsewhere/have them order one).
I haven't made a decision yet, but I'm leaning towards the Orca Aero. They have a 2019 model at a price that is simply fantastic and in the color I'd like it in. I just need to take it for a ride and determine if the 57 is the proper size for me or the 60 is (in which case I'd have to look elsewhere/have them order one).
08-06-19, 03:04 PM
#75
Senior Member
I did close to 10 hours of hard pack riding last week. I was in over my head with this crowd, so I spent almost all of the time sheltered from the wind. Wheel sucking- I know, sorry.
So out of 10 hours of riding, possibly 5 minutes was in a situation where aero was important.
So out of 10 hours of riding, possibly 5 minutes was in a situation where aero was important.