• 01-16-2019
    Waspinator
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by cxwrench View Post
    You have not posted anything other than 'I feel' and 'it seems'...while some others have posted videos and graphics describing legitimate testing time and time again. The have posted substantial evidence while you have posted none. Congratulations on joining the troll elite.

    Oh, out comes the “troll” accusation. That was fast!

    Look dude... people have better things to do with their time than study bicycle aerodynamics. The only people who would bother to spend any time (and money) on it would be, you guessed it, bike manufacturers who have something to sell. You know what we do in medicine with studies funded by pharmaceutical companies and product manufacturers? We toss them. Actually, we read them, discuss them at the fancy dinners and lunches, and then ignore them and go on about our business, directed by independent studies by people who have no stake in a given product.

    So yeah, it would be awfully hard for me to find a well-designed, independent, peer-reviewed study in the glorious and popular field of bicycle aerodynamics. Nobody but people selling bikes (or in business with people selling bikes) gives a hoot about the topic. So all we have are studies like the ones in the video: flawed and misguided.
  • 01-16-2019
    Waspinator
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by tlg View Post
    Yet every single thing you've said is just your unsubstantiated opinion with zero facts to support it.

    So I ask yet again. What do you consider negligible?

    Do you dispute these results? Do you consider this negligible?

    http://img848.imageshack.us/img848/8...elapr2011n.png

    I don’t dispute those results (but it’d be helpful if I knew what CdA was). What I dispute is the significance of the results - ie the extrapolation of it to more speed in a bicycle race.

    Lighter bicycles. Stiffer frames. Better drivetrains. Better wheels. And likely better athletes have produced the faster times we see today. But to say that aerodynamics of a bicycle frame (which has a very small total surface area and aerodynamic cross sectional area) makes an appreciable difference when you have a large clunky human being on top of it with his chest forward into the wind simply flies in the face of reason and common sense.

    Would you make this claim about frame aerodynamics if the rider were the size of a gorilla? An elephant? See my point?
  • 01-16-2019
    tlg
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Waspinator View Post
    Oh, out comes the “troll” accusation. That was fast!

    Fast? It's been 170 posts. None of which you've provided any proof to your claims.

    Quote:

    So yeah, it would be awfully hard for me to find a well-designed, independent, peer-reviewed study in the glorious and popular field of bicycle aerodynamics. Nobody but people selling bikes (or in business with people selling bikes) gives a hoot about the topic. So all we have are studies like the ones in the video: flawed and misguided.
    That's a crock of $#it.. Just proving yet again you have utterly no clue what you're talking about There's lots of independent facilities doing wind tunnel testing.

    https://www.sciencelearn.org.nz/reso...ng-of-cyclists

    https://www.slowtwitch.com/Products/...est__6309.html
    Slowtwitch forum member Kiley Austin-Young crowd raised money to test various super bikes in the A2 Wind Tunnel with AeroCamp mavens Heath Dotson and Brian Stover. Jimmy Seear of Ventum and Dan Kennison of Premier Tactical were also there to assist and have their bikes tested. Geoff Eaker of A2 ran all the tests and slowtwitcher BryanD assisted in various ways. Bikes tested were Felt B2, Premier Tactical, Cervelo P5X, Cervelo P5/6, Diamondback Andean and Ventum One.


    (Maybe you could rent a wind tunnel and do some testing. Prove us wrong. Come to think of it, if what you say is true, why hasn't this been done? Should be easy and make someone really rich and famous debunking every single bicycle manufactuter)
  • 01-16-2019
    tlg
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Waspinator View Post
    I don’t dispute those results (but it’d be helpful if I knew what CdA was). What I dispute is the significance of the results - ie the extrapolation of it to more speed in a bicycle race.

    :crazy::crazy::crazy::crazy::crazy::crazy::crazy:: crazy::crazy::crazy::crazy::crazy::crazy::crazy:

    You don't even know what CdA is and YOU are disputing the significance of the results. WOWWWWW. To bad you don't know how stupid what you just said sounds.
  • 01-16-2019
    Marc
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Waspinator View Post
    Oh, out comes the “troll” accusation. That was fast!

    Look dude... people have better things to do with their time than study bicycle aerodynamics. The only people who would bother to spend any time (and money) on it would be, you guessed it, bike manufacturers who have something to sell. You know what we do in medicine with studies funded by pharmaceutical companies and product manufacturers? We toss them. Actually, we read them, discuss them at the fancy dinners and lunches, and then ignore them and go on about our business, directed by independent studies by people who have no stake in a given product.

    So yeah, it would be awfully hard for me to find a well-designed, independent, peer-reviewed study in the glorious and popular field of bicycle aerodynamics. Nobody but people selling bikes (or in business with people selling bikes) gives a hoot about the topic. So all we have are studies like the ones in the video: flawed and misguided.

    Not really....took 3 days of non-stop idiocy on your part and 176 posts. So, it really was overdue.
  • 01-16-2019
    asgelle
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Waspinator View Post
    That argument is ridiculous.

    Someone made a claim about aerodynamics, and I’m calling it BS based on the fact that there is no good research to justify the claim. So it falls upon me to prove the claim wrong?

    Absence of evidence is not the same as evidence of absence. To spell it out in gory detail not that it should be necessary, you didn't claim there was no evidence that frame aerodynamics matters; you claimed that is doesn't matter. Surely even you can see the difference.
  • 01-16-2019
    Oxtox
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Waspinator View Post
    ...it’d be helpful if I knew what CdA was...

    game over, bro.

    you've proved you're clueless and just here to argue pointlessly.
  • 01-16-2019
    taodemon
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by tlg View Post
    :crazy::crazy::crazy::crazy::crazy::crazy::crazy:: crazy::crazy::crazy::crazy::crazy::crazy::crazy:

    You don't even know what CdA is and YOU are disputing the significance of the results. WOWWWWW. To bad you don't know how stupid what you just said sounds.

    Told you.:lol:
  • 01-16-2019
    asgelle
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Waspinator View Post
    Would you make this claim about frame aerodynamics if the rider were the size of a gorilla? An elephant? See my point?

    I have a dog, a horse, and an elephant carrying a loaded pack. I make each one's five pounds lighter. Which one had the most weight removed?
  • 01-16-2019
    Waspinator
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by asgelle View Post
    I have a dog, a horse, and an elephant carrying a loaded pack. I make each one's five pounds lighter. Which one had the most weight removed?

    Which one had the greatest percentage of its weight removed? Which one noticed the biggest change?

    That’s the question you should be asking.
  • 01-16-2019
    mfdemicco
    Waspinator dude, you need to heed to the immortal words of Kenny Roger in "The Gambler:"

    "You've got to...
    Know when to fold 'em
    Know when to walk away
    And know when to run…"

    I mean, it seems like you're against everybody and their grandmother in this thread.
  • 01-16-2019
    asgelle
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Waspinator View Post
    Which one had the greatest percentage of its weight removed? Which one noticed the biggest change?

    That’s the question you should be asking.

    Except for cycling that can't be answered; it's unique to each rider. That's why serious people don't bother to address it. They worry about what is knowable.
  • 01-16-2019
    Waspinator
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by tlg View Post
    :crazy::crazy::crazy::crazy::crazy::crazy::crazy:: crazy::crazy::crazy::crazy::crazy::crazy::crazy:

    You don't even know what CdA is and YOU are disputing the significance of the results. WOWWWWW. To bad you don't know how stupid what you just said sounds.

    If knowing what that abbreviation were of any significance whatsoever, I could have easily googled it rather than pointed out that I didn’t know what it was.
  • 01-16-2019
    Lombard
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Waspinator View Post
    I’m a doctor (eg physician).

    Really? You must not have very many patients as you have a lot of time to argue on message boards.
  • 01-16-2019
    asgelle
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Waspinator View Post
    If knowing what that abbreviation were of any significance whatsoever, I could have easily googled it rather than pointed out that I didn’t know what it was.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning–Kruger_effect
  • 01-16-2019
    cxwrench
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Lombard View Post
    Really? You must not have very many patients as you have a lot of time to argue on message boards.

    Frames, brakes, q/r vs thru axle...he's started some doozies.
  • 01-16-2019
    Lombard
    Quote:
    Waspy is a physician. I sure as heck hope he's not a psychiatrist.
  • 01-16-2019
    Oxtox
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Lombard View Post
    Waspy is a physician. I sure as heck hope he's not a psychiatrist.

    nope, he only claims to be one.

    based on his contributions to this thread, I wouldn't let the guy treat a hangnail...
  • 01-16-2019
    cxwrench
    Quote:
    I tried...
    You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to asgelle again.
  • 01-16-2019
    PBL450
    Quote:
    Haha, talk about BS research references. Are you a PhD in Psychology? Which branch? I’m going to assume your scholarship agenda is in cognitive psychology? Why anyone with your psych research background would point to this is hard to digest... I’m happy to read up on your scholarship, I’d love to in fact... Please send me some references to get me started. I follow the currency in social mostly... But I love Quant psych. Prove you are right!!
  • 01-16-2019
    cxwrench
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by PBL450 View Post
    Haha, talk about BS research references. Are you a PhD in Psychology? Which branch? I’m going to assume your scholarship agenda is in cognitive psychology? Why anyone with your psych research background would point to this is hard to digest... I’m happy to read up on your scholarship, I’d love to in fact... Please send me some references to get me started. I follow the currency in social mostly... But I love Quant psych. Prove you are right!!

    I may be reading your post wrong, but if not where do I find the go fund me to buy you a sense of humor?
  • 01-17-2019
    PBL450
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by cxwrench View Post
    I may be reading your post wrong, but if not where do I find the go fund me to buy you a sense of humor?

    Haha, I just thought it was ironic after all the goading to justify the OPs academic preparation that the poster would use such dubious material... It would be funny if the poster hadn’t been seriously mean spirited in previous posts. I don’t see any humor after outright insults. Other posters have engaged with OP without being obnoxious.
  • 01-17-2019
    Lombard
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by PBL450 View Post
    Haha, I just thought it was ironic after all the goading to justify the OPs academic preparation that the poster would use such dubious material... It would be funny if the poster hadn’t been seriously mean spirited in previous posts. I don’t see any humor after outright insults. Other posters have engaged with OP without being obnoxious.

    If you read through the OP's history, you will see why he gets lit up a lot.
  • 01-17-2019
    Waspinator
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Lombard View Post
    If you read through the OP's history, you will see why he gets lit up a lot.

    I get lit up a lot because too many people posting here are incapable of having a debate without taking disagreement personally.
  • 01-17-2019
    cxwrench
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Waspinator View Post
    I get lit up a lot because too many people posting here are incapable of having a debate without taking disagreement personally.

    You go beyond a 'debate'...you're completely and totally incapable of understanding the other side much less admitting it could be correct. You are stubborn beyond belief and troll-like in your habit of starting these threads. There are nearly 200 posts in this trainwreck and you're the only one on your side. That should tell you something about this 'debate'.