Further to yesterday’s submit, through which I pushed George Plimpton’s Y-Foil a.ok.a. The Charity Ride Destroyer to its very limits (or no less than gently nudged it in the direction of the overall neighborhood through which it limits may presumably be discovered)…
…you might have famous that the bike has quite a tall fork crown, which Paul of Classic Cycle has in comparison with “high-waisted denims:”
I had simply assumed the body should require an unusually proportioned fork as a result of the body is optimized for aerodynamics and blah blah blah, however in line with Y-Foil nerds on the Internet it’s as a result of Trek designed the bike to be appropriate with a suspension fork:
Today after all gravel bike suspension forks have gotten more and more frequent, Lob assist us:
[My gravel bike suspension fork buyer’s guide: Don’t.]
But like so many different concepts in biking which are at present common, that is nothing new, and for awhile there riders have been even deploying them at Paris-Roubaix:
Anyway, if what I’ve learn is true and the Y-Foil is certainly “suspension-corrected,” this provides a wholly new dimension to its dorkiness, and it’s turning into more and more clear to me that relating to absolutely comprehending the character and magnitude of its dorkitude I’ve solely simply barely begun to make out its contours within the fog.
Also additional to yesterday’s submit, my totally scientific testing confirmed that George Plimpton’s Y-Foil a.ok.a. The Charity Ride Destroyer is certainly sooner than The Ultimate Dad Bike:
Exhilarated by the fun of discovery, I resolved to speed-test yet one more bike. But which? La Faggin con Spinerghese? The Cervino with its pro-quality tubular tires and cutting-edge componentry from 1982? But testing but extra highway racing bikes simply appeared like splitting hairs. Then it hit me: why not strive one thing totally different, just like the Homer?
Setting out, I knew the Homer can be slower than each the ‘Mond and the ‘Foil. The actual query was: How a lot slower would it not be? So I strapped on a pair of sandals and hit the highway. The consequence?
Yeah, that’s proper: whereas the Homer was slower than the Y-Foil, it beat the LeMond by 15 seconds.
How might this be?!? How might the Homer, full with full fenders, touring tires, a headlight sitting on the market within the wind, and 36-spoke wheels (nicely 36 rear, 32 entrance) carry out almost identically to the featherweight LeMond with its minimally-spoked ultralight race wheels? Well, I’ve just a few theories:
- Jan Heine is true and wider tires are sooner (even once they’re rugged Schwalbes with reflective sidewalls and never supple Heinian tires)
- Due to the aforementioned wider tires, plus the bike’s inherent stability due to its lengthy wheelbase, I used to be in a position to experience sooner over the tough sections of the bike path the place the roots are forcing the pavement to buckle
- The Homer is extra comfy, and so I used to be in a position to spend extra time within the drops
- While I truthfully thought the Homer can be measurably slower, as soon as I obtained began possibly I subconsciously hoped for an upset and thus made extra of an effort with out realizing it
- Ironically the handlebars on the Homer are narrower than the bars on each the Y-Foil and the LeMond, so possibly handlebar width is much more vital than stuff like spoke rely, which would definitely clarify why the professionals are using such slim bars lately
- As an outdated, out-of-shape, and balding semi-professional bike blogger, I merely don’t experience quick sufficient to understand any of the advantages of aerodynamic bicycle tools
I believe every one in all these theories has benefit, however in the end I believe it’s that final one which explains like most of what’s happening right here.