A good time for 10km TT?

Tom Kunich wrote:

Gee, remember Oscar Savilla beating Lance?

no.

OK, he had a great day. That's why he lost to LeMond. Oh, I keep
forgetting that Oscar rode faster than Lance because Lance had that
damn Aero helmet. Wait, it was the aero bars that won LeMond's Tour and
not Fignon bobbing up and down and throwing the bike back and forth
never able to get on top of the gear he had.

moron, sevilla never beat lance in a TT. you're thinking of botero.

wrote:
Tom Kunich wrote:

Gee, remember Oscar Savilla beating Lance?

no.

OK, he had a great day. That's why he lost to LeMond. Oh, I keep
forgetting that Oscar rode faster than Lance because Lance had that
damn Aero helmet. Wait, it was the aero bars that won LeMond's Tour and
not Fignon bobbing up and down and throwing the bike back and forth
never able to get on top of the gear he had.

moron, sevilla never beat lance in a TT. you're thinking of botero.

Well it was obviously the fault of Lance's aero helmet wasn't it?

Tom Kunich wrote:

The truth is that it takes quite a bit of effort to gain an
advantage from aero equipment

Oh yeah, it's a lot of effort to slap on some aero wheels instead of
ones with box section rim, to choose an aerodynamically designed frame
instead of one made with round tubes, to put on a skinsuit instead of a
jersey and shorts, etc. Heck, it even takes very little effort to use
aerobars, assuming you don't change anything else about your position
except where you place your arms.

and the gain is very small unless you're
pretty fast to begin with

We've already been over this: slower riders actually benefit more from
reducing their aerodynamic drag.

and those gains are very easily lost to wiggling
and sitting up and all those sorts of things that slower riders do.

And so what if they are? Except perhaps for the use of aerobars,
there's essentially no interaction between how smooth somebody is and
the equipment they ride, so to bring such things into the discussion is
simply a red herring.

All that glitters isn't gold - some of it is metal flakes in the horse turds.

I assume that you're talking about your posts?

Andy Coggan

Tom Kunich wrote:
And streamlined recumbents hold the record of 80.55 mph. That's 262% of
the UCI new rules record.

The record is 80.26kph compared to 49.7kph... making it 161%.

And how does this prove that aerodynamics does not matter?

Ron Ruff wrote:
Tom Kunich wrote:
And streamlined recumbents hold the record of 80.55 mph. That's 262% of
the UCI new rules record.

The record is 80.26kph compared to 49.7kph... making it 161%.

The record is 80.55 MPH. http://suewidemark.com/speedchallenge.htm

And how does this prove that aerodynamics does not matter?

Since he did this on a 60 lb faired recumbent does it prove that weight
doesn't matter?

wrote:
Tom Kunich wrote:

The truth is that it takes quite a bit of effort to gain an
advantage from aero equipment

Oh yeah, it's a lot of effort to slap on some aero wheels instead of
ones with box section rim, to choose an aerodynamically designed frame
instead of one made with round tubes, to put on a skinsuit instead of a
jersey and shorts, etc. Heck, it even takes very little effort to use
aerobars, assuming you don't change anything else about your position
except where you place your arms.

So your position is that these changes will make a difference in the
time of a beginning time trialist? Why is it again that open recumbents
don't hold TT records? If memory serves, the RAAM faired recumbent
record is only 1 mpg average faster than the team time of a standard
bike. Why just adding a few aero advantages would have given the
upright a clear advantage huh?

and the gain is very small unless you're
pretty fast to begin with

We've already been over this: slower riders actually benefit more from
reducing their aerodynamic drag.

Not if they cannot hold their positions which in fact is the CASE with
beginning time trialists. Andy, you have a lot better sense than that.
You know that aero isn't an advantage until you can TT reasonably well.

and those gains are very easily lost to wiggling
and sitting up and all those sorts of things that slower riders do.

And so what if they are? Except perhaps for the use of aerobars,
there's essentially no interaction between how smooth somebody is and
the equipment they ride, so to bring such things into the discussion is
simply a red herring.

The wind tunnel data that you yourself cited several times on the group
showed that some riders actually have WORSE aerodynamics from aero bars
that aren't tuned to their particular posture.

All that glitters isn't gold - some of it is metal flakes in the horse turds.

I assume that you're talking about your posts?

What I'm talking about is the sort of crap you're passing out where you
are simply saying that it doesn't matter if the rider actually knows
anything or has the ability to take advantage of expensive equipment as
long as they spend money they'll have better times.

The truth is that is crap pure and simple. Hell of a lot of good that
aero equipment did Michael Rasmussen now did it? And he is a
professional rider with impeccable credentials. You'd have us believe
that a not particularly fast Cat 5 beginning Time Trialer should spend
money on aero equipment before concentrating on his riding skills?

Tom Kunich wrote:
The record is 80.55 MPH. http://suewidemark.com/speedchallenge.htm

That isn't the *hour* record. The hour record is 80.26kph.

Since he did this on a 60 lb faired recumbent does it prove that weight
doesn't matter?

Yes.

"Tom Kunich" wrote in message
ups.com...
Ron Ruff wrote:
Tom Kunich wrote:
And streamlined recumbents hold the record of 80.55 mph. That's 262% of
the UCI new rules record.

The record is 80.26kph compared to 49.7kph... making it 161%.

The record is 80.55 MPH. http://suewidemark.com/speedchallenge.htm

And how does this prove that aerodynamics does not matter?

Since he did this on a 60 lb faired recumbent does it prove that weight
doesn't matter?


From what I can find,

HPV flying 200m record 81.00 mph / 130.36 kph

Standard bike flying 200m record 45.35 mph / 72.98 kph

HPV 177% faster


HPV standing start hour record 51.33 mph / 82.60 kph

Standard* bike hour record 34.36 mph / 55.29 kph

HPV 149% faster

*For this example I am considering Rominger's record as the recognized one
because it is still using equipment allowable in all events except the retro
hour.

Tom Kunich wrote:

So your position is that these changes will make a difference in the
time of a beginning time trialist?



Dumbass -


Even beginners should start to learn to do things the right way. That
way they don't have to unlearn, then relearn.

If a rider aspires to become good at TTs, then he/she should do some
training in the aero position.

Duh.


thanks,

K. Gringioni.

Kurgan Gringioni wrote:
If a rider aspires to become good at TTs, then he/she should do some
training in the aero position.

I seem to recall reading somewhere that when Basso first came to CSC Riis
made him ride his TT bike as frequently as was practical. Perhaps
Rasmussen could have done with a bit of Riis's help.