Additional to yesterday’s submit, during which I pushed George Plimpton’s Y-Foil a.ok.a. The Charity Experience Destroyer to its very limits (or at the least gently nudged it in direction of the final neighborhood during which it limits may presumably be discovered)…
…you will have famous that the bike has somewhat a tall fork crown, which Paul of Traditional 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 accordance with Y-Foil nerds on the Web it’s as a result of Trek designed the bike to be appropriate with a suspension fork:
At present after all gravel bike suspension forks have gotten more and more widespread, Lob assist us:
[My gravel bike suspension fork buyer’s guide: Don’t.]
However like so many different concepts in biking which might be at the moment fashionable, that is nothing new, and for awhile there riders had 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 completely new dimension to its dorkiness, and it’s turning into more and more clear to me that on the subject of absolutely comprehending the character and magnitude of its dorkitude I’ve solely simply barely begun to make out its contours within the fog.
Additionally additional to yesterday’s submit, my totally scientific testing confirmed that George Plimpton’s Y-Foil a.ok.a. The Charity Experience Destroyer is certainly quicker than The Final Dad Bike:
Exhilarated by the fun of discovery, I resolved to speed-test yet one more bike. However which? La Faggin con Spinerghese? The Cervino with its pro-quality tubular tires and cutting-edge componentry from 1982? However testing but extra street 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 could 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 street. The outcome?
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? Properly, I’ve a couple of theories:
- Jan Heine is true and wider tires are quicker (even after they’re rugged Schwalbes with reflective sidewalls and never supple Heinian tires)
- As a result of aforementioned wider tires, plus the bike’s inherent stability due to its lengthy wheelbase, I used to be in a position to journey quicker 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
- Whereas I truthfully thought the Homer could be measurably slower, as soon as I received began perhaps I subconsciously hoped for an upset and thus made extra of an effort with out realizing it
- Paradoxically the handlebars on the Homer are narrower than the bars on each the Y-Foil and the LeMond, so perhaps handlebar width is much more necessary than stuff like spoke depend, which will surely clarify why the professionals are driving such slender bars lately
- As an previous, out-of-shape, and balding semi-professional bike blogger, I merely don’t journey quick sufficient to understand any of the advantages of aerodynamic bicycle gear
I believe every one in every of these theories has benefit, however finally I think it’s that final one which explains like most of what’s occurring right here.
