TT specific bikes for age-groupers

[Nick777]

Hi all,
How much (in terms of time saved) is a dedicated TT bike worth to an age-group cyclist/triathlete over approximately a 40k course? I would have thought that if you are only averaging 35kph or so, a normal road bike with race wheels & aero bars wouldn't be that much slower?

 

[Aus_Orca]

Very true you may not get that much extra in terms of speed out of the bike for many age-groupers, but what you do get from a properly setup tri bike is a saving in the legs by activating different muscle groups, which allows for a better run leg.

 

[brianf7]

Hi all,
How much (in terms of time saved) is a dedicated TT bike worth to an age-group cyclist/triathlete over approximately a 40k course? I would have thought that if you are only averaging 35kph or so, a normal road bike with race wheels & aero bars wouldn't be that much slower?

Depends how old you are sometimes the TT bike is slower than a good road bike.
You need to alow pleanty of time to get used to the TT bike. But when you get it going well and it feels good then you may improve your time a little.

Generaly over the past 15 years Vets times are not a lot improved with introduction of TT bikes a little but not a lot.
Time trials are horrible so having a flash TT bike helps it also makes you look good..

 

[flyor64]

Hi all,
How much (in terms of time saved) is a dedicated TT bike worth to an age-group cyclist/triathlete over approximately a 40k course? I would have thought that if you are only averaging 35kph or so, a normal road bike with race wheels & aero bars wouldn't be that much slower?

Velonews did it pretty good job analyzing it all the way down to disks vs. spokes, and skin suit vs bibshorts, vented helmet vs aero etc.

I think skin suit, aero helmet, and aero bars were the best bang for the buck...

The bike itself was not the best time saver, etc...

Here's an excerpt of that article.

Cheers

 

[Nick777]

Velonews did it pretty good job analyzing it all the way down to disks vs. spokes, and skin suit vs bibshorts, vented helmet vs aero etc.

I think skin suit, aero helmet, and aero bars were the best bang for the buck...

The bike itself was not the best time saver, etc...

Here's an excerpt of that article.

Cheers

Excellent - thanks for the link.

 

[tonyg4074]

Yes it helps--a lot.

I am a geriatric triathlete and switched to a TT bike this year for the first time, after 30 years experience in triathlons on a road bike. I most recently rode a Scott CR1 with Corima singles and Campag Record, set up with tri-bars, and bought an Argon 18 E114 triathlon bike. I hate riding the tri-bike--the neck strain on looking ahead is most unpleasant. I had almost no experience on the tri-bike, but the first race I rode it in I improved my time from a previous best (over the last 10 years) on a road bike of 53 minutes to 47 minutes on the tri-bike. It was as if there was an extra motor on board. I averaged 36 kph instead of 31 or so. For those familiar with the course, it was the bike leg of the Port Arlington triathlon--a 28km loop. For a course with lots of U-turns, the improvement is much less dramatic, but I've found it, on average, to be 10-15% faster, so I'm persevering, even though it's a pig to ride!

 

[bc_hills]

Velonews did it pretty good job analyzing it all the way down to disks vs. spokes, and skin suit vs bibshorts, vented helmet vs aero etc.

I think skin suit, aero helmet, and aero bars were the best bang for the buck...

The bike itself was not the best time saver, etc...

Here's an excerpt of that article.

Cheers

Interesting that the article assumes an average speed just about bang on with Merckx's hour record. The article leaves me with a couple of questions: the first question is, "are those savings that the fictional rider would gain, or that he'd lose if he wasn't already geared up aero?" and second, "what are the time/cost savings of the program the rider is on?". If a 48 min 40k time trial is you baseline, then you're either a monster and props to you, or you're using irrelevant data.

To me the article says, if you can crank watts like Merckx, here's what you'd gain. Other people read, spend money and be faster. Learning to endure pain would give you more bang for the buck (but not really, I guess, because that $hitt can't be bought) than anything else (unless you already ride like Merckx and you've got that covered).

So that article says nothing to the OP. What are the real gains if you ride at 30 km/hr? Rant aside, i bet a decent aero set-up (bars and comfortable aero position) would give you a couple kms and hour advantage over 40 k.

peace

 

[flyor64]

Interesting that the article assumes an average speed just about bang on with Merckx's hour record. The article leaves me with a couple of questions: the first question is, "are those savings that the fictional rider would gain, or that he'd lose if he wasn't already geared up aero?" and second, "what are the time/cost savings of the program the rider is on?". If a 48 min 40k time trial is you baseline, then you're either a monster and props to you, or you're using irrelevant data.

To me the article says, if you can crank watts like Merckx, here's what you'd gain. Other people read, spend money and be faster. Learning to endure pain would give you more bang for the buck (but not really, I guess, because that $hitt can't be bought) than anything else (unless you already ride like Merckx and you've got that covered).

So that article says nothing to the OP. What are the real gains if you ride at 30 km/hr? Rant aside, i bet a decent aero set-up (bars and comfortable aero position) would give you a couple kms and hour advantage over 40 k.

peace

Yeah I thought the same thing about the speed...

I need to dig up the print article again but I believe they wrote something to justify their position...

I believe it can still be of benefit if you are considering any or all of the options for your age group TT...

 

[ihavenolimbs]

So that article says nothing to the OP. What are the real gains if you ride at 30 km/hr? Rant aside, i bet a decent aero set-up (bars and comfortable aero position) would give you a couple kms and hour advantage over 40 k.

At 30 km/h, the absolute time savings from aero equipment will be more than at 50 km/h.

The following article is a pretty good overview of aero choices too:
http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/how-aero-is-aero-19273

Personally, I've found that my TT bike is saving me about 1.5 minutes per 15 km (on my lactate-threshold intervals & TT training route), compared to the road bike (Scott CR1). And it's not because the TT bike is aero, because it isn't especially (it's a Scott Plasma 2), but because I can ride with a very comfortable and aero position. I could never get comfortable and aero with clip-ons on a road bike, it's either one or the other.

 

[bc_hills]

At 30 km/h, the absolute time savings from aero equipment will be more than at 50 km/h.

The following article is a pretty good overview of aero choices too:
http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/how-aero-is-aero-19273

Personally, I've found that my TT bike is saving me about 1.5 minutes per 15 km (on my lactate-threshold intervals & TT training route), compared to the road bike (Scott CR1). And it's not because the TT bike is aero, because it isn't especially (it's a Scott Plasma 2), but because I can ride with a very comfortable and aero position. I could never get comfortable and aero with clip-ons on a road bike, it's either one or the other.

Thanks for the link, good article! I was surprised to read that, "if you can ride a road bike at 40km/h and switch to a time trial bike and helmet, you can do over 44km/h." (http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/how-aero-is-aero-19273). I honestly didn't think it would be that much of a boost.

I'm still trying to wrap my mind around the idea that the time savings at lower speeds are greater (you mention this and the article mentions it also):

"You will save more time but fewer watts at slower speeds with these improvements. The constants are the percentage aero drag savings."
(in notes at http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/how-aero-is-aero-19273)

I would have thought that air resistance rises exponentially as a your speed increases so that your aerodynamics become more and more significant. It sounds like it's the opposite. Can anybody comment on that?

Thanks!

 

[twothirds]

Thanks for the link, good article! I was surprised to read that, "if you can ride a road bike at 40km/h and switch to a time trial bike and helmet, you can do over 44km/h." (http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/how-aero-is-aero-19273). I honestly didn't think it would be that much of a boost.

I'm still trying to wrap my mind around the idea that the time savings at lower speeds are greater (you mention this and the article mentions it also):

"You will save more time but fewer watts at slower speeds with these improvements. The constants are the percentage aero drag savings."
(in notes at http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/how-aero-is-aero-19273)

I would have thought that air resistance rises exponentially as a your speed increases so that your aerodynamics become more and more significant. It sounds like it's the opposite. Can anybody comment on that?

Thanks!

Air resistance does rise exponentially with speed, and that's partly the reason why you see less benefit from aero equipment for stronger riders versus weaker riders. It requires 4 times as much energy as you are currently expending if you want to double your speed. So saving 10 watts is a more dramatic change to a slower rider's output than a pro's as wattage savings makes up a larger percentage of the weaker rider's total output than it does for a pro (an additional 10 watt for a rider putting out 250 watts versus an additional 10-11 watt for someone putting out 400 watts). That's one reason for weaker riders receiving a more dramatic boost from aero equipment.

The other reason is that the slower riders are out on the course longer than the faster ones, so even though they get the most benefit from the equipment, their still reaping the rewards of it for longer than someone spending less time out on the course.

 

[bc_hills]

Thanks twothirds, that clears it up for me.

 

[Milessio]

twothirds was partially correct.

A slower rider will gain more in absolute terms (minutes, seconds etc), but the percentage saving will be less, due to the lower speed compared to a faster cyclist.

Turning a road bike into a TT bike will always be a compromise, but if you only have one bike & don't mind making the changes for riding a TT it's not going to be a huge disadvantage.

Also remember UCI legal TT bikes are often not best for an aerodynamic position due to their restrictive rules.