Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - precision6625

Pages: [1]
1
The Tour Magazin tests are by far the best out there (way ahead of anything from GCN, Cycling Weekly, Bikeradar, Bikerumor, etc). They test at the GST wind tunnel, this is the same wind tunnel Swiss Side uses. They use a moving leg dummy.

But indeed, you can't take take the results at face value. The main problem is that they don't standardize the handlebar, which is a big part of the aero equation. The wheels can also be a problem -- sometimes they give an additional figure with the reference wheelset (Zipp 404), but sometimes they don't.

For example, they're tested the 3T Strada (both the 1st and 2nd gen), and they give it 211w and 210w respectively with Zipp 404s. But then you realize that both were equipped with round-ish fully-wrapped bars...that's another ~7w, which makes the 3T Strada just as fast as the fastest mainstream bikes (Aeroad, S5, SystemSix). Yet the Strada is never referred to as such.

I believe the only open mold frameset they've tested is the Baldiso Air Flight One, which is the Workswell WCB-R-306. It scored 212w with 50mm wheels and a one-piece aero handlebar, so it's a fair bit slower (~8w) than the mainstream aero bikes. There's also the Myvelo Verona, which I assume is some open mold frameset (not sure), and it had a terrible score around 222w with Zipp 404s and a one-piece aero handlebar.

Those numbeds are also weighted. They take drag numbers at different yaws and use an equation to get a number from those measurments. The equation favours lower yaw angles, but it still dpesn't tell the whole story. For example: S5 and Aeroad have the same result in tour tests, but if you look at tests that show the yaw/drag graph, you'll see that the S5 if faster at lower yaw angles (no wind of full headwind) and the aeroad if faster at higher yaw angles (crosswinds). Even though the equation tries to balance that out, the reality is that in real world conditions the S5 should be faster something like 90% of the time.

Not sure I follow your reasoning. The weighting function is based on real-world yaw distribution, so if one bike has a lower weighted drag than another, it will be faster most of the time in the real world. If one bike is 5w faster at 0 yaw than another bike that is only 5w faster at 10deg+ yaw, then this will surely be reflected by the former having a lower weighted drag.

2
Road Bike Frames, Wheels & Components / Re: Speeder Cycling SC-R55D
« on: September 26, 2024, 10:14:46 AM »
It is the same photo that speeder uses on their website for the SC-R55D.

Adapt calls it the FM55 (see: three more 3D renderings). Looks identical except Adapt says theirs has T47, which I don't think is possible without an entirely different frame mold, considering it's bigger than BB86. Or it's just a listing error.

3
Road Bike Frames, Wheels & Components / Re: Speeder Cycling SC-R55D
« on: September 23, 2024, 03:49:21 PM »
Thanks for the photos and information. It looks pretty good. Fork blades are nice and thin. It's not the most modern design -- the seatstays could be dropped far more with the seatstay-seat tube junction drafting right behind the ST water bottle (Supersix). The HT-TT junction ridge on the side is a bit unsightly. The seatpost looks a bit wider than I expected. The bottle cage mounts looks like they could both be ~1cm lower, unless those particular bottle cages sit unusually high. But ultimately it's still the best-looking aero frame I've found under $1000 USD.

How did you resolve the BB issue? Are you sure it was 40.5mm, because that's really bad. I think when people talk about undersized BBs they're talking 0.05mm, maybe 0.20mm at worst below the ideal 40.98mm. But almost 0.5mm below is quite something, I'm not even sure it would be ok to take off that much with a reamer in one go? Might be best to go at it with a flap wheel first, then finish with a reamer.

4
Follow the instructions for the Hope RX4+ flat mount mineral oil. They're almost identical.



(note: youtube embed not working, just search "Hope Technology: How to Bleed RX4 Shimano Calipers / Brakes" on youtube)

https://www.hopetech.com/webtop/modules/_repository/1/documents/RX4Instructions_Min_EN_FR_DE.pdf

Both the ZRace XG and Hope RX4+ have the bleed port near the top of the caliper, which isn't as good as Shimano's "One Way Bleeding" with the bleed port at the bottom. But it should still be completely possible to get them to the same level, just with a bit more effort. Follow all the tips the Hope mechanic mentions.

5
Road Bike Frames, Wheels & Components / Re: Speeder Cycling SC-R55D
« on: September 11, 2024, 12:14:17 PM »
Interesting to hear about the custom paint. So that’s the matte carbon version then?

RTP is raw carbon*. Matte is usually a clear coat, at least. He also offered glossy (see SC-R52D thread for examples).

I might just ride it raw until spring, I'm pretty sure there isn't a risk of UV damaging the resin in that time frame.

*although apparently if you buy an S-Works SL8 RTP, it actually has a thin clear coat, which isn't actually "ready-to-paint", but rather just the lightest finish possible to satisfy weight weenies

6
Road Bike Frames, Wheels & Components / Re: Speeder Cycling SC-R55D
« on: September 10, 2024, 10:40:32 AM »
Just put in an order for the SC-R55D after a dozen emails with questions and requests :) Communication with Justin is always smooth and he usually replies within a day (if not an hour or two), though I feel bad about bothering him for a single frame.

I think this frameset looks really good. Similar to the Tavelo Arow, but some differences in shaping (look at the TT-HT junction), plus this frameset has SRAM UDH, a round steerer (much preferred from a safety perspective), concealed dropout holes. Compared to the older SC-R52D model, I think the fork crown and seatstay junction shaping is much better, as well as the deeper-profile fork legs.

I'm buying this frame for the aero upgrade -- I won a few cat 3 road races this year on a heavy round-tube aluminum gravel frame, but it will be harder to continue with it at the Pro/1/2 level. Aero-wise, I think the SC-R55D is probably decent enough. Looking through the Tour Magazine wind tunnel tests, the similar Wilier Filante SLR tests around 210w @ 45kph with Zipp 404 wheels. For comparison, the fastest road bike is the Simplon Pride II, basically a TT frame, and it's at 202w with the same wheels. Supersix Gen 4 and SL7/SL8 are somewhere in between the two. Comparing the SC-R55D to the Filante, the fork legs are deeper, the seatpost appears narrower, the seatstays attach lower, and the fork-HT transition looks more modern. So aero performance is probably on par with the SL8, at the cost of 100g or whatever, which I don't care about.

I was actually planning on buying a Supersix Gen 4, but after trying out a 58cm model, my thighs rub against the top tube. And I think this is a problem I will have with most aero bikes with wide, high top tubes. I could size down, but then that decreases the front-center too much, which isn't ideal for handling at my height. So I settled on the SC-R55D size 535, which has a lower top tube, and front-center almost identical to the Supersix 58cm at 606mm. The downside there is that the stack is pretty low, so I might need to use a number of spacers, but I'm thinking of using an up-angled stem instead (i.e. the Simplon Pride / Cervelo S5 / TT bike strategy).

The only real downside is BB86. Not ideal for DUB of course. I'll be measuring it with a bore mic. Worst case, buy a 40.98mm reamer ($150) and/or BBInfinite bottom bracket ($200) and it's still a good deal I think.

Oh and the shaping of FSA ACR spacers is slightly annoying. Spacers are on the leading edge of the bike and it seems like low-hanging aero fruit to make it airfoil shaped like the SL7/SL8 rather than a rounded rectangle. I'll either try to print something, or maybe try using a Deda DCR upper headset instead, as the shaping is a bit better.

Unfortunately, custom paint isn't available for a single frame. So I'm getting it RTP (ready-to-paint). Going to do spray.bike, which might be a pain in the cold of ~November, but I'll figure something out.

Prices (USD): $660 frameset (including seatpost), $30 headset, $20 thru-axles, $50 additional zero-offset seatpost, $172 shipping + paypal

Thru-axle dimensions:
Frame 164mm M12*P1.0*L18
Fork 120mm M12*P1.5*L12

7
Road Bike Frames, Wheels & Components / Re: Elves Eglath Pro Build
« on: October 03, 2023, 12:21:32 PM »
How are the Stone 2x chainrings? Like if you're spinning slowly does it consistently hook onto the first shift pin available and shift up, as stock Shimano does? And shifts under heavier loads, cross chains in the big ring acceptably, etc?

8
While a steel bike frameset will probably never be as aero as a carbon one, I think the fork is probably a big part of the aero frameset equation, being on the leading edge, so why not try to maximize the aero-ness of a carbon fork on a steel bike?

I'm looking for:
- minimal fork leg thickness
- aero cross section (airfoil/kammtail, not a plain oval)
- minimal fork crown
- No "lip" behind the fork crown designed to mesh with the frame, should be round-ish like the SL7 (or at most a small lip)
- supports 32mm tires
- internal routing from steerer

I'm assuming most manufacturers will allow me to buy just the fork from a frameset, but I'm not actually sure that's true.

Ideally I would just get an Aeroad CFR or SL7 fork as those frames test quite well in the wind tunnel and have minimal/round-ish crowns, though obviously you can't just buy those.

Options I'm considering:
- Workswell WCB-R-306 / WCB-R-309 (not sure they would sell me one)
- Carbonda/Flybike FM1056
- Carbonda/Flybike FM1136
- Dengfu R12
- Elves Falath Evo
- Ican/Triaero A22
- Speeder SC-R52D
- Velobuild VB-R-168
- Yoeleo R11

If anyone has any measurements on fork blade thickness/depth, I would love to know. It's pretty hard to tell based on photos.

If anyone else can think of any other options, I'd love to know.

Thanks!

Pages: [1]