Aerodynamics / Aerodynamic Cost / Aero parts

Did we do this already... http://road.cc/content/news/99329-british-cycling%E2%80%99s-secret-squirrel-club%E2%80%99-developing-new-aero-helmet-and-drag

Surely the Q-factor decrease is going to be the big saving.

Maybe but I'm more interested in the difference to the bike because you can get low q with gears already and reducing q can cause bio-mechanical problems so it's not a given you can just reduce q when going fixed.

SRAM wireless would help plug in all the holes neatly.

Wireless over Di2 only saves the tiny length of cable going to the rear derailler and possibly some weight which is basically irrelevant, well, at least until you have to carry you bike home when the SRAM fails.

Custom disc wheel with one of these.

You got me thinking about it, with a 1x11 option, there's only the rear derailleur and button to worry about, may not be significant, but I wonder how much aerodynamic advantage not having cable on the handlebar and derailleur.

My hands cover the Di2 shifters so they're a non-issue. There's no exposed cables on my bike except for a couple of cm of wire going to the rear derailler. I'll probably give 1x11 a go soon so I will lose the front derailler and inner ring which is probably the bulk of the savings anyway.

All these savings need to be offset against the compulsery fixeh curry-er bag.

And the mad whip skidz at every opportunity

As mentioned the front mech (especially my massive Ui2 one) is a biggie, and you have one less brake lever. But otherwise its all at the rear of the bike.

Narrower rear Wheel.
Cable loop to rear mech.
Rear mech.
Cassette vs Sprocket.

Let's face it, if there were big enough gains to be had from going fixed to offset the problem of being in the wrong gear most of the time, TT results would be dominated by fixed gear riders. Can anybody name the last person to make the top 12 of the BBAR on fixed, excluding @pnut ? The reputation of fixed for being fast is hugely distorted by a few records set by Boardman and Obree who would have been faster on gears but rode TTs on their track bikes because track was what they were really concerned with.

It's taken me a while to get up to my geared speed on fixed too, and I train on the track bike a LOT both indoors and out. You can't just hop on a track bike and do a TT and go quicker, you have to work at it a bit.

Thinking about upgrading the steel frame'd track bike...

Will an aero seatpost really make a difference?

Currently running shallow drop fsa wing pro's, but would an even more wing-y aero handlebar make any difference?

Wheels are already obvious regarding deep sections and so on, I'm wondering about the other parts.

some of this is possibly a bit antiquated, but probably not a bad general guide...

http://cyclingtips.com.au/2010/04/biggest-bang-for-your-buck-in-time-trial-equipment/

Amazeballs, thanks.

Will an aero seatpost really make a difference?

It might make things worse, according to some old test of Giant/ONCE bikes with and without the wing post. It depends on the interaction with your thighs. Either way, it's likely to be quite close to the noise floor.

Hmm, i avoid much contact with the frame, thighs aren't too chunky. But maybe better looking at aero helmet and accepting that's best it gets for the frame setup

You didn't answer my question though.

http://www.bicycleretailer.com/product-tech/2015/03/31/shimano-introduces-flat-mount-road-bike-hydraulic-calipers-new-tiagra-and#.VSkUyZwo_IU

Aerodynamics?

Calipers are inline with the frame so out of the wind.

Left/right alignment is the same as it ever was, since they haven't changed the position of the rotors relative to the dropouts. Can't see any meaningful benefit over post-mount. Of course, what we really want to know is whether using undersized rotors and them compensating with huge cooling fins on the brake pads is really the best idea.

Still a cleaner unit and has no bolts sticking out.

140 really is all you need on the back, I have those finned pads but did go with a 160 on the front.