-
For the first time this year I entered into the land of aero testing and understanding truly the difference in equipment choices and position.
I am fully convinced the difference between £10k of new gear and tunnel time and well thought out 2nd hand equipment is so so much smaller than you think.
For example, in my specific frame (noting I didn't personally pay for this tunnel testing), the difference between front wheels from a £3.7k Princeton and a 'standard' Roval which can be had 2nd hand for a couple of hundred quid is............ <3w. Everything else tested in between. The fastest wheel was a slightly more expensive Roval but still a fraction of the Princeton.
That's an extreme example but it carries through to so many facets of equipment choice. Helmet testing for me was all within 4-5 watts. The fastest helmet tested, I subsequently bought 2nd hand for £150.
Tl;dr yes it's frustrating that some can just buy watts, but unless they are really well informed, I bet they aren't buying as much as you think and in some cases they may even be making themselves slower.
onyerbike-
the difference between front wheels .... <3w.. Helmet testing for me was all within 4-5 watts.
Yeah, guessing on frames, wheels, tyres, helmets, skinsuits by just reading forums gets you within an aggregate 20W of what you could achieve with six hours of tunnel time. You're still out £5-10k just buying what you guess will be fastest if you're starting from scratch and buying new. If you just hazard a guess on position, you can easily be throwing away another 20W, and if you can't see air the only way around that is money or time (which is the same thing as money if you're not minted). Now, for anybody who doesn't care about winning, that's neither here nor there, but if medals matter, 40W is a lot to be giving away to competitors who are prepared to throw almost unlimited resources at the problem.
Testers have always obsessed over gear, and now they obsess over more of it and its correct application than ever, but they rarely consider the thing which absorbs greater resources and affects the outcome more in favour of the well resourced competitors - training. Whenever somebody says its a more or less level playing field because you can scrounge up something close enough for £1k by scouring the classified section, they don't explain where a single parent with a minimum wage job is supposed to find the time.
The win is bought, but not in the way people obsess over. It was always the case, in this and every other sport.
gbj_tester
Yeah I feel a bit conflicted. On the one hand (in my time as a tt-er, so all of the 2010s) it was always about the bike, from nick bowdleresque fairings and xav’s homemade helmet and leg aerofoils, to sawn off bars and drillium in hill climbs. I love the slightly mental nature of wringing everything one can out of a bike. But the problem is that previously it seemed that most of these madcap innovations were “relatively” affordable. Real enthusiasts were out home testing different positions, but it seemed more about an investment of time rather than money. Last tt I did, a near rival turned up with £10k+ of new gear and tunnel time and beat me by 2minutes. It feels like there is nothing I can do with a 2004 bike and second hand parts. Maybe the older hands will say it was always thus but it just feels like a money game now.
Then again, you’re only racing yourself, right?