That was immediately what I thought too. You’d still aim to output the same power, you’d just go faster by doing so (and therefore expend less energy as you’ve ridden for less time).
It’s the flaw of how aero is now talked about in terms of watt savings “for the ease of the reader”. In trying to simplify things so they don’t have to get into questions about cda, they actually prevent you from easily doing a calculation like Poet was attempting.
Absolutely… I wanted to make the point that even with pretty generous gains, the difference between a 2011 TT bike and the latest £10,000 super TT bike is actually relatively small.
If you are fighting for podiums or Kona Slots, maybe 4 minutes or so makes a difference, but imagine how much time you could take off with £10,000 worth of swim coaching (for me probably 20 minutes). A set of Nike go faster trainers will take more than 4 minutes off the run time, at just £250
… having said all that, @Jorgan would have gone under 10 hours if he lost 4 minutes
…but there are so many variables; the bad weather probably cost me more than a minute. My mental pacing calculations were also flawed, as I had based it on every time I passed T2 again; but the finish was actually the best part of a Km after that point on the last lap! Plus these ‘super bikes’ didn’t exist in 2011; so it’s moot.
Yes. I mocked up the edit of the Wiki page.
Good spot by @stenard on the cursor there
On the 6.5W saving thing.
My CdA is what BBS estimated when I fed it a 25TT power file from a race and all my details (weight, bike weight etc)
But, I see the default CdA for TT bars is 0.2914.
I’m on 0.2802 average.
The Cube TT bike would get that down to 0.26675
So, all other things being equal.
214.6W output over the Kona Course
£400 PX Exocet II
(EDIT - I bought some wheel for £225 as well)
5hrs 27mins 57secs
I’m sure you can go under 10 hours before you hit 50, I think that the Trek is up to the job… I see you on Zwift, quietly working away, getting seriously quick.