You know how Canyon, Trek, Pinarello etc claim they have the “fastest” bike? How about an actual test that pits top manufacturers’ top aero bikes against each other? A line up like cannondale, Canyon, Cervelo, Pinarello, Specialized, Trek? I’m sure I’m forgetting lots of them but you get the idea.
As a someone else arleady said. Pit the top bikes against each other, lets say Cannondalo, Trek, Specialized etc. I think a video about that might be really interesting as it effects basically everyone who looks to get a new bike or is atleasted interested in one. Id love to see how the new superix evo perfroms. Thanks for the videos GCN!
It all makes sense. This is why I’m so slow on my 2012 Road bike. It’s not that I’m getting older and slower it’s just that my bike is too old and slow. Thanks guys! 😅
You've done a few of these types now, Si's sl3 etcs . Its about time you took an older lighter rim brake frame and actually tried to made it go as fast as possible with best wheels, aero everything, seat post, intergrated stem and 36 bars, water bottles etc. I personally think thats MUCH more relavent to people owning a 10 year old frame. Maybe even pick some of the most common strava routes in the UK and exrapolate the windtunnel tests.
It's a great idea! We've also done a documentary over on GCN+ previously when we compared the performance of retro vs modern bikes. You can check it out here 👉 gcn.eu/rvm
At ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-QqLHDd-O3nE.html Si suggests a 2022 Canyon Aeroad is 3kmh faster, on the flat, at high speed, than a 2013 Tarmac SL3. This video at 9:20 suggests the speed penalty of a 2013 era bike, at 40kmh, is 1.5kmh. At a more realistic average speed of 30kmh, the speed penalty would be 0.5 - 1.0kmh perhaps?
I would love to see a comparison of a modern aero bike with a normal "comfortable" riding position vs a traditional style light bike with an aero optimized position. This would really show whether you could get equal performance out of a lightweight traditional bike.
@@markhawkes8006 different bikes on different days in different surroundings. Si was going on all aspects, not just aerodynamics, but in a less scientific real-world test rather than pure wind tunnel aerodynamics. Of course there will be a discrepancy. Re. speed penalty, they are racing bikes. Is 30Km/h really a more realistic average speed for people who are flying along in a bunch at race speed, especially in the pro ranks with FTPs in excess of 400 watts? The pros aren't worried about how much they're saving on a training ride, and that's who these bikes are ultimately designed for.
I coached rowing for 10 years and the exponential hydrodynamic power speed relationship is so pronounced. World class heavy men might put out 750 watts each while my junior high school lightweight women’s crews averaged about 350 watts each but were only 20-25% slower.
@@kidShibuya 😄 I was involved in elite men’s ergometer testing for the national team once. One guy put out about 1000 watts no prob. He could leg press 340 kg easily. They had to do special training for the small muscles in the ribs in front of their lats because they pushed so hard with their legs that the pulling on their ribs would cause stress fractures!
@@turboseize the 1000 watt guy was a sprint effort, 1000 watts over 2k would probably be about a minute faster than the world record! 750 watts over 2k might be 20-25 sec faster than a world record. I think world record pace over 2k is about 600 watts.
@@charlesblithfield6182 That's why I was asking. Usually, whenever someone is stating some Watts it's either over 6min or over 2k, as these are the standard tests. (At least they used to be 25years ago, when I was still training and my coach had not given up hope yet.) Even I have pulled over 700 Watts as a master's "athlete" recently - for a 222m sprint. You can see by the careful choice of race distance how serious of an event that was. Training was strictly squat, deadlift, pull-ups and bench pull with no rowing or erging involved for the two years preceeding the event. 😀 The nice thing about sprint races is that they are over before the pain hits you... Whish there were more of them.
I have a dogma 60.1 and a new F. My husband has a F8 and a F. We love our bikes so much!! Thank you for doing all these videos on Pinarellos, so sweet to see science confirm why we love our new and old bikes. We mostly ride the new ones of course, but I still love my 60.1 and often travel with it because it is easier and lighter to pack. Ollie, we think you are awesome!!
The 2012 Dogma is my favorite aesthetically, it looks so much more cuvy and organic than the other versions. Even though it's a 2012, I'd have thought it were an ~07 model yeah. It really reminds me of early 2000s futurism.
Great job Ollie. You lined up your positions identically between the different bikes in the side profile shot. We have no choice but to be convinced by the results.
@@unklesannjay They are comparing bikes, not frames. Thus, handlebar width differences should be affecting the results, otherwise it is not a "bike to bike" comparison, but a "frame to frame" comparison. Likewise, they don't change wheels, which also do and should impact the results.
@@carlnyman4903its a valid point but in the real world anyone with a ten year old top quality frame interested in these results would likely be looking at buying tbe best components for their bike. Most 10 year old bikes have prob had every component changes bar calipers, and stem and bars. Imho there is no reason to compare bikes not frames.
Not-so-small correction at 9:10 or so: power vs velocity is actually a cube relationship. Drag *force* is a function of velocity squared, and power is force times velocity, ergo power from aero drag is a function of velocity cubed. So 5W more at 25kph would be more like 40W more at 50kph (8x more power required at double the velocity).
Excellent comparison. Thanks. The most surprising with bike aero is it took so long to get a dominant design parameter. Considering basic understanding of drag was already around by WW2 times. Conservative sport I guess.
We hope you enjoyed it! If you like this type of video, you may also like our 'Retro vs Modern' doc over on GCN+. You can check it out here 👉 gcn.eu/rvm
F8 with 42cm round bars, none integrated stem, exposed cables and it’s only 5W slower? Sort that out and it’d be faster than the F disc in all scenarios seeing as it’s already lighter. It’s also, the F8, got a semi hidden bottle cage on the downtube, that’s where the F gets it from. They are a bit harsh of a ride though, couple of psi out of the rear tyre needed.
For an upcoming wind tunnel test, I'd love to see 'system performance' of the top two vs bottom two TdF team setup. I've heard on the Nero Show (Chris Miller/Jesse Coyle) and other places that professional rides want to ride Specialized due to the overall system performance (bike/kit/helmet/etc). It'd be incredible to understand if there is a notable different in system performance that gives the big teams with more money, the best riders and even bigger advantage akin to what you see in F1.
Well done GCN Tech! Some interesting data right there! =) One comment: with the new naming convention, "the F" is no longer one bike, and with some GCN presenters rocking the Pinarello F, which is not top of the line, and others rocking the DOGMA F, which is, there is lots of room for misunderstandings. That said, more data driven videos please, keep it up! =)
Thanks, we're glad you enjoyed it! If you like this type of video, you may also like our 'Retro vs Modern' doc over on GCN+. You can check it out here 👉 gcn.eu/rvm
Would be cool if they all had the same handlebar width and potentially same rims. Also I’m not sure if the drag at 40km/h in the tour is so straightforward. If anything, wouldn’t it be lower drag than your testing at lower speeds because they spend most their time drafting? I think the wattage savings would be less than your numbers at 35…
@gcntech a rough estimate!?, what are you smoking, you went to a windtunnel and you can't be bothered to get rid of unknown variables like changing the damn bars.
@@mikpiotto But that's the whole point. Bars trended narrower over the past decade in the pursuit of aerodynamics, which coincided with changes to the rest of the bike. If you start applying the advances from intervening years it's not a 2012 bike anymore.
@trainiax they said theyre not studying the benefits of narrower bar, and technology didn't need to advance to make narrower bars. What's appalling is that they went to a wind tunnel to get a general idea of aerodynamic advancements when they literally could get exact data.
I liked it. The section showing the benefits for pro racers made the differences more meaningful and clear. For myself though, I’ll probably give the Dogma’s a pass for commuting to work and the odd weekend ride when the kids are otherwise occupied.
I agree with you. And its not popular but modern Chunky heavy stupid bikes are nice to ride. Now all we need to do is figure out how to drop the weight but keep the smoothness
Great comparison! One question though: do the Watts required for 35 kph include rolling resistance, drivetrain efficiency, etc.? Or ist it only the Power required to overcome the drag? My Bike should be comparable top the F2, but I need significantly more than 200 W for 35 kph.
Thanks, we're glad you enjoyed it! If you like this type of video, you may also like our 'Retro vs Modern' doc over on GCN+. You can check it out here 👉 gcn.eu/rvm
Very interesting video !😉 Big fan of Pinarello for a long time ..! I currently pedal on an F8 it is very comfortable ! I confirm it to you it is also very effective !! Nice job 👌✨✨👍
You should probably take into account that in mass start events, the vast majority of riders are sat in the wake of the rider/riders in front. They rarely get to use the full aero savings you experienced in the wind tunnel.
Thanks, we're glad you enjoyed it! We've got more tech docs over on GCN+ which you may enjoy including our 'Retro vs Modern' one. You can check it out here 👉 gcn.eu/rvm
Nice vid, but you made a typical mistake regarding the power/speed relationship. The FORCE you need to work against when riding at a given speed increased quadratically with the speed and thus the POWER, which is force times the speed (work per second), increased cubically. Thus, 2x the speed means 8x (!) the power, at least when we consider aerodynamic drag as the only resistance.
Can you consider the following: 10y old road bike (rim brakes, 2x11 groupset) upgraded with deep section wheels 40-50m, 28mm wide and modern low rolling resistance tires and aero handlebars. This seems like a very common upgrade case of old road bike for the enthusiastic amateur drivers and I assume that there are many who want to know how much slower is their already upgraded bike comparing to the same type of frame of the modern bikes, focusing only regarding the frame difference between 10y old bike and modern bike. Also the comfort and bike feeling aspect.(* I will exclude the disc brakes difference topic)
This is my precise question. B/c I do have a 10 yr old carbon road bike that I upgraded deep 60mm wheels, aero handlebars, Ultegra group set. I wonder how much faster will a new aero road bike REALLY be?
@@broyjam16 this is really common scenario, I don't know why there is no actual test so far. They are so many tests comparing old vs new bike but they are with much different components/setups: tires width, rims, groupset, cockpit shape and width, body position (due to stem size, headset vs saddle height ), sometimes the are even comparing 10y old endurance frame vs new aero frame etc.
My tongue would fall out if I try to do 35 Kmph as my Average Speed on my Single Speed Gear Bicycle. My Max Speed till date is only 34.2 Kmph. LOL :) I can definitely say modern bicycles are really faster :) We as a normal audience wouldn't get an opportunity to look at wind tunnel testing, So Awesome & Thanks GCN Tech :)
@@musclelessfitness2045 Most of the time I am faster on my fixed/single speed bike on small climbs, but it's not because of the weight. It's because in SS/fixed you're always in the wrong gear, as a result, you have to exert extra effort and push harder to maintain momentum.
@@ClintDaligdig87 I know, but suppose the gradient doesn't vary too much and that you could get over the climb by only changing your cadence by 5-10. I would like to see that test be done.
Add those Vittoria Corsa Pro tyres and you'll gain even more. I'm getting 0.8km/hr more speed (75 mile ride av 20 mph) when cross referenced with HR/power output (125bpm/184 Watts) Bike 2016 Giant TCR. Maybe I should get a Dogma F?
I have enjoyed, this stuff fascinates me as just a mere spacecraft astronautics engineer, but energy loss is energy loss, more vibration in a bike will end up as heat energy, it’s just how it is. Aerodynamics wise looking at the development of biplanes around WW1 almost mirrors bike development now, round cables cause massive turbulence and drag. Must say GCN is not doing much to quench my desires for a Pinarello.
Thanks, we're glad you enjoyed it! If you like this type of video, you may also like our 'Retro vs Modern' doc over on GCN+. You can check it out here 👉 gcn.eu/rvm
I'm going to challenge that disk brake penalty. The dogma's standard calipers and their cables are as present to the wind as a disc caliper and rotor. A manufacturer would have to design the best bike they could with rim brakes and the best they could with disc brakes and compare them to truly answer that question.
All good stuff. And true when it comes to lone flat speed and average speed. So great for Fondo racing and road bike TTs (and possibly in a sprint if you haven't missed the jump). But most road races in the UK are won on steep, short climbs where weight certainly makes a difference (AdH is pretty flat). On a 2km climb at 12-20% tell me 1kg doesn't make a difference! All well and good being faster (by yourself) on the flat, but if you're out the back after a climb, it's game over. Yes, aero and comfort are good, but weight needs to come down - it's not one or the other.
A Sensa Aqila. It has full Ultegra 8000 and full carbon frame and in 2019 cost £1300. So price per pound it's a great bang for the buck. You can borrow my bike, but I think it's the best value bike around:)
From a slightly different perspective: one of the biggest challenges for racers is nutrition, it is just hard to get in enough calories. Given a race speed of 40 kph and a length of about 85 hours, a TdF rider would have to eat an additional 1.2 lbs of pasta going from the 2023 to the 2015 and 2.0 lbs going from the 2023 to the 2012, just to overcome the aero drag differences. (not really because of sheltering and how the times at higher speeds warp the numbers etc but still...) I would show my working but it is decidedly messy involving lots of unit conversions, an online drag curve estimator and the USDA's calorie per cup database.
The drag scaling is not "exponential". It is quadratic assuming CdA remains constant across all velocity regimes (which it probably doesn't but we'll ignore that for now) because the dynamic pressure scales with the velocity squared. However, drag is a force that the rider has to overcome to maintain the current velocity. Power is force times velocity. Therefore, the wattage should scale with the velocity to the power of three.
hence i say it’s not totally accurate and simple, but as a rule of thumb going from 25-50kph on a bike you are looking at that sort of increase in power.
@@GCNuser123 Actually it kinda is that simple, at least assuming the cdA doesn't change with speed. With other parameters at typical values, a crr of 0.0045 and a cdA of 0.3m^2 leads to about 88.5W required for 25 km/h. An improvement in the cdA of 0.025 (i.e. a resulting 0.275 cdA) will save you about 5W@25kph. The same cdA improvement will save you 40W at 50kph (515W instead of 555W). That's an 8x increase of watt savings, which is exactly what you expect due to the cubic relationship.
So basically buy a modern rim brake bike 😂 with a narrower handlebar and better wheels and tyres such as the 2023 TCR SL frameset... I guess just like you did on the tests showing the 2 F12s on the rim Vs disc the rim model was faster on EVERY TEST 😂😂😂
If you're gunning for absolute best performance I guess so, but if you need to pay for your own bikes and wheels... Go for the disc version just so you don't have $2000 consumable items on your bike in the form of wheels with brake tracks
@@ska042 stop taking rubbish I've owned Reynold assaults from 2014 which are still mint... Now on campy boras only purchased those as I got them cheap on the UK cycle scheme.... You'll only wear out rims fast if you're using carbon wheels in winter then u may aswel be using sandpaper as brake blocks... To solve this use a alloy training wheels I'm using R5 Shimano wheels on their third season now and cost me £50 new off Facebook... The cost of 1 rotor... Only reason you'll wear out wheels fast on rim brake bikes is user error like using carbon wheels in winter 😂😂
@@danc1829 How inane is it to go "uhh yeah I use rim brakes because they're FASTER" and then spend half the year on much slower "winter wheels" anyway. Not to mention that where I live at least, the summer is not a magical no-rain season
@@ska042 but your also forgetting to mention you pay a premium for a disc bike 🤦♂️ Look at giant or canyon the disc model is at least £400 more it's also heavier... With that £400 you've saved you could buy some alloy training wheels and still have a lighter, cheaper and more aerodynamic bike... Not forgetting it's also much easier to maintain and cheaper on parts and labour... No rubbing or bleeding to contend with either. Just a £1.99 cable u may need to replace every few years that takes all of 5 minutes.
Cute report vid, but us mere mortals can’t afford these bikes so none of this matters. We enjoy our bikes that we bought in 2014 like an R3 and we go fast enough on a very light bike with size 28c tires for comfort.
Aerodynamics is one aspect. Road test (flat and hilly) and brake type (rim vs discs) comparison would be necessary to conclude on the fastest bike. Thanks anyway!
I would like to see a similar test between time-trial bikes of the same age span comparing the gains from rim brake bikes to hidden cables and seamless cockpits to the future of non 3:1 ratio designs approved by the UCI.
I remember Wiggins complaining about how he hated that bike. The Dogma2 He won on it, but he didn't love it. And it isn't widely accepted that discs are an aero penalty.
I wonder how the f8 would do with some more narrow aero bars as opposed to the wider conventional shaped handle bars? that would save a few watts and get the f8 closer to the f
@@jimmyhor78 I'm afraid your wrong, they do not advertise it because the manufacturer (shimano) wants the consumer to buy disk brake for loads of money
Yes your correct the F is available as a frameset I believe. Also GCN did tests a while back on 2 pinerello F12s one being disc and the other being rim. The only difference was the brakes and the rim model was faster at every speed and yaw angle tested
If there isn’t one already, let’s see a video comparing what happens with two bikes, with different weights, on a couple of steep hills. An older, non-aero Trek Emonda, for example, vs a new Trek Madone, fo. When I say steep, I mean maybe one climb with 8 percent grade and one with 12 percent or above. Where I live, there are many such hills. A bit more interest added to the endeavor would be to have a lightweight rider and a heavier rider test out what would happen on the same bikes.
Ollie, increased stiffness in the carbon layup is always marketed as an improvement, combined with comfort. It would be interesting to measure any potential improvement created by increased stiffness against the advantage of lower weight. For example, I have just bought a Giant TCR Advanced with Ultegra Di2 & Hunt 1230g wheels. It is c500 g more than my 2016 Cannondale SuperSix EVO HiMod Ultegra. Assuming the Giant is x amount stiffer, does that offset the increased weight? I guess it’s a case of trying to strip out any aero advantage which may make the exercise difficult, if not impossible.
Are rim brakes more aerodynamic or are you just assuming this? A disc is a narrow object slicing to the wind and the Dogma F has this twisted bit on the left side of the fork to guide the air around the calliper. I‘m not so sure that this is less aerodynamic that a relatively convoluted object like a rim brake.
I'm not convinced that a tiny 2mm wide metal disc is slower than rim brakes. The disc calipers are very well integrated into the bike and more aero unlike rim calipers, the rim and tire interface is a better fit making disc more aero and increased tire clearance around the fork of a disc bike is an aero improvement. All you have in return is a thin sharp spinning disc thats supposed to negate all of those other improvements? Maybe at yaw angles I can see the disc causing more drag but certainly not head on.
@@tweettweettwitch that's already been wind tunnel tested before disc brakes made their way to road bikes. From what I remember there was no practical difference but aerodynamics can do some weird things in specific circumstances.
@@gcntech yeah but good point on watts per £ for how much pro teams are investing N’s us mere mortals. I will just continue to drool over the Dogma F 😊
For the racers looking for tiny competitive advantages, it is significant. For the rest of us, the massive increase in price means that it makes absolutely no sense to buy a top end new bike. keep your old one!
With all the emphasis on marginal aero gains these days I'm surprised no manufacturer is putting fairings over the chainset. They'd need to be very lightweight and thus susceptible to damage but surely worth it for important events. Or would it not be UCI legal?
They should also cover the crank - is a measurable savings. Have no idea why they don't. Maybe for the same reason disc wheels are banned for most racing events.
l ll still put money on the F8 for climbing and looks .The F2 looks fantastic too :) l m old skool which is always Better!! RIM for ROAD DISC for dirt !!! KEEP YOUR DISCS FOR GRAVEL AND MTBs
Thake the bikes e ride in the real world. Test it in flat, climbing and dh. Take the time in each segment. Does the greater weight of the F penalize you uphill? more than he earns on the plains? How much advantage will disc brakes give on downhills? These would be really interesting tests. No one ride in the wind gallery 😉
Ollie is suppose to be the scientist on the GCN team and he just made the "exponential" mistake. When things on a graph go up really fast non-scientists will use the word "exponential", however something is only exponential if the equations behind it are exponential equations. In this video at timestamp 8:36 "as speed increases drag increases exponentially" WRONG, it increases with a squared relationship. Bad scientist Ollie, "exponential" has a proper meaning. Look up the drag equation on Wikipedia mate.
in last video, the Rim Brake version Pinarello F12 is Slightly faster than Disk Version. is about 5W...... i don't feel that new F disk will faster than F Rim version on Flat or Mountain. dont follow marketing trend. but only things i do believe is braking Disk is better than Rim.
2013 Specialized Shiv Expert. 205 W at 35kmh. Dogma road beats a American Tribike. Handlebars and front brake ?? 1980s touring bike ( Falcon Super Tourist ), 258 W at 35kmh. If I ever got to that speed by pedaling.
From what I determine from this video unless you’re a high-level racer you do not need a new bike. You can get away with a 2012 bike for your club rides even for your local races. And there’s way cheaper ways to gain aero without buying a new 5-10k bike
