un-aero

Quoted message said:

Ok guys, when you go through all the trouble of installing an
aerodynamic handlebar for your TDF TT bike, the least you can do is
install it in such a manner that it points in the actual direction of
the airflow. A round tube would prove to be more areo than this one
(if used in this manner):

http://www.cyclingnews.com/road/2006/tour06/tech/?id=/photos/2006/tech/features/tour_bikes7/IMG_1058

Dumbass,

The lift generated by the wing section reduces load on the front wheel,
cutting down on rolling friction. Chung will now make a chart or
rolling resistance on front wheels vs rider wieght vs aerodynamic drag,
and then plot all 172 riders in the Stage 7 TT.

in message <[email hidden]>,

(') said:

Ok guys, when you go through all the trouble of installing an
aerodynamic handlebar for your TDF TT bike, the least you can do is
install it in such a manner that it points in the actual direction of
the airflow. A round tube would prove to be more areo than this one
(if used in this manner):

http://www.cyclingnews.com/road/2006/tour06/tech/?id=/photos/2006/tech/features/tour_bikes7/IMG_1058

The idea is not that the bars should be 'aero' in isolation, but that the
assemblage of rider and bike have the lowest possible drag coefficient.
These bars bring the riders arms and hands close to his face and
therefore presumably reduce turbulence. Without the rider and a wind
tunnel, how are we to tell whether this configuration is better or worse
for /that/ rider on /that/ bike?

In any case, Rasmussen has as we saw last year difficulties with his time
trial bike. If this makes him comfortable and confident enough to get to
the finish line without falling off, that may be more important than
aerodynamic efficiency anyway.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

...but have you *seen* the size of the world wide spider?