Originally Posted by
rubiksoval
It's estimated. So like I said, without power, it's difficult to tell what actually happened.
Might be difficult, but hardly impossible.
Power = work/time
The time is nearly identical in both cases, so let's focus on work. Much of the work will be in the form of hill climbing W= mgh. The amount of climbing (h) is almost identical. All of the work is integrated force over distance, and the distances are almost identical. The estimated values for power are coming out as almost identical, even if their numerical values are systematically skewed by 20%. So the differences in frictional forces, wind drag, etc, have to be quite small. Again, this is consistent with
Jan Heine's previous experimental results.
An independent control is to look at the cadence in both cases. It, too, is essentially the same.
It is a completely reasonable first experiment.
My point isn't that it is ready for publication. I am just saying the OP is being too modest suggesting it is unscientific.
I have to admit I don't understand why he concludes narrow tires are definitely faster.