Why aren't road bicycle wheels tiny?Advice on aero wheelsWhy are hand-built wheels considered to be better than machine-built wheels?Does group riding negate the aero benefit of deep rim wheels?Why are wheels so important for racing?Road bike frame for offroad/cx wheelsWhy no wheels with rope instead of spokes?Where does aero wheels noise come from?Can it be estimated when it would actually be beneficial to increase drag in tailwind?Why do deep section front wheels get pushed around in crosswinds?Can bicycle parking stands damage wheels?
Is there really no use for MD5 anymore?
Pulling the rope with one hand is as heavy as with two hands?
Philosophical question on logistic regression: why isn't the optimal threshold value trained?
Can an Area of Effect spell cast outside a Prismatic Wall extend inside it?
Map of water taps to fill bottles
Apply MapThread to all but one variable
How to not starve gigantic beasts
What are the steps to solving this definite integral?
Is Diceware more secure than a long passphrase?
Minor Revision with suggestion of an alternative proof by reviewer
Why do games have consumables?
What's the name of these pliers?
"You've called the wrong number" or "You called the wrong number"
Function pointer with named arguments?
Can SQL Server create collisions in system generated constraint names?
Can we say “you can pay when the order gets ready”?
Pre-plastic human skin alternative
How to stop co-workers from teasing me because I know Russian?
Mistake in years of experience in resume?
Relationship between strut and baselineskip
Could the terminal length of components like resistors be reduced?
Can I criticise the more senior developers around me for not writing clean code?
How can Republicans who favour free markets, consistently express anger when they don't like the outcome of that choice?
Critique of timeline aesthetic
Why aren't road bicycle wheels tiny?
Advice on aero wheelsWhy are hand-built wheels considered to be better than machine-built wheels?Does group riding negate the aero benefit of deep rim wheels?Why are wheels so important for racing?Road bike frame for offroad/cx wheelsWhy no wheels with rope instead of spokes?Where does aero wheels noise come from?Can it be estimated when it would actually be beneficial to increase drag in tailwind?Why do deep section front wheels get pushed around in crosswinds?Can bicycle parking stands damage wheels?
My understanding is that air resistance is where most of the pedal power goes to at high speeds, and that this is a concern not least for the wheels: What you pay for in a road bike wheel is aerodynamic and/or light wheels, not so much to other losses like rolling resistance and bearings.
So if air resistance is the thing to optimize a wheel for, the wheel should be tiny. Obviously in width, but also in radius, because even shortening the length of a surface reduces boundary layer drag, and the top half of each wheel is basically a surface that moves faster than the rest of the bike. Has anybody thought of this?
Postulate: The faster angular speed of a small wheel is irrelevant to air resistance: If the forward speed is given, every point on the wheel at a given fractional wheel radius has a speed compared to the ground that is independent of the wheel radius. In other words, shrinking the wheel does not speed up any point on its surface; you just get less surface. Which should be good!
Some speed record bikes have had small wheels, including the current record holder.
wheels aerodynamics
New contributor
This question has an open bounty worth +50
reputation from Nobody ending ending at 2019-05-03 15:04:20Z">in 6 days.
One or more of the answers is exemplary and worthy of an additional bounty.
|
show 19 more comments
My understanding is that air resistance is where most of the pedal power goes to at high speeds, and that this is a concern not least for the wheels: What you pay for in a road bike wheel is aerodynamic and/or light wheels, not so much to other losses like rolling resistance and bearings.
So if air resistance is the thing to optimize a wheel for, the wheel should be tiny. Obviously in width, but also in radius, because even shortening the length of a surface reduces boundary layer drag, and the top half of each wheel is basically a surface that moves faster than the rest of the bike. Has anybody thought of this?
Postulate: The faster angular speed of a small wheel is irrelevant to air resistance: If the forward speed is given, every point on the wheel at a given fractional wheel radius has a speed compared to the ground that is independent of the wheel radius. In other words, shrinking the wheel does not speed up any point on its surface; you just get less surface. Which should be good!
Some speed record bikes have had small wheels, including the current record holder.
wheels aerodynamics
New contributor
This question has an open bounty worth +50
reputation from Nobody ending ending at 2019-05-03 15:04:20Z">in 6 days.
One or more of the answers is exemplary and worthy of an additional bounty.
13
Uh, what is the single largest (by far) source of both weight and wind resistance for a bicycle (that's being ridden by a human)?
– Daniel R Hicks
Apr 22 at 22:03
9
And concoct an adult-sized bike with 16-inch wheels. Take it out on a highway and ride it 50 miles. Then come back and explain why wheels should be small.
– Daniel R Hicks
Apr 23 at 0:34
5
@Mazura yes, that's what a wheel is. The question was, why one should not be optimized for air resistance and how to explain the wheels that are commonly used in racing.
– ojs
Apr 23 at 5:37
6
@DanielRHicks Or just roll a piece of furniture on casters down the street.
– David Richerby
Apr 23 at 8:35
6
The rule book never explicitly states that bikes are banned for being too good or aerodynamic. They have rules on tube shapes and bike geometries which are to keep the spirit of the sport. A bike being raced today must be recognisably similar to bikes of the past. A recumbent is banned because of this rule. The rule would also prohibit pennyfarthings, so it's not performance.
– Carbon side up
Apr 23 at 8:44
|
show 19 more comments
My understanding is that air resistance is where most of the pedal power goes to at high speeds, and that this is a concern not least for the wheels: What you pay for in a road bike wheel is aerodynamic and/or light wheels, not so much to other losses like rolling resistance and bearings.
So if air resistance is the thing to optimize a wheel for, the wheel should be tiny. Obviously in width, but also in radius, because even shortening the length of a surface reduces boundary layer drag, and the top half of each wheel is basically a surface that moves faster than the rest of the bike. Has anybody thought of this?
Postulate: The faster angular speed of a small wheel is irrelevant to air resistance: If the forward speed is given, every point on the wheel at a given fractional wheel radius has a speed compared to the ground that is independent of the wheel radius. In other words, shrinking the wheel does not speed up any point on its surface; you just get less surface. Which should be good!
Some speed record bikes have had small wheels, including the current record holder.
wheels aerodynamics
New contributor
My understanding is that air resistance is where most of the pedal power goes to at high speeds, and that this is a concern not least for the wheels: What you pay for in a road bike wheel is aerodynamic and/or light wheels, not so much to other losses like rolling resistance and bearings.
So if air resistance is the thing to optimize a wheel for, the wheel should be tiny. Obviously in width, but also in radius, because even shortening the length of a surface reduces boundary layer drag, and the top half of each wheel is basically a surface that moves faster than the rest of the bike. Has anybody thought of this?
Postulate: The faster angular speed of a small wheel is irrelevant to air resistance: If the forward speed is given, every point on the wheel at a given fractional wheel radius has a speed compared to the ground that is independent of the wheel radius. In other words, shrinking the wheel does not speed up any point on its surface; you just get less surface. Which should be good!
Some speed record bikes have had small wheels, including the current record holder.
wheels aerodynamics
wheels aerodynamics
New contributor
New contributor
edited Apr 23 at 19:46
user2394284
New contributor
asked Apr 22 at 21:30
user2394284user2394284
15416
15416
New contributor
New contributor
This question has an open bounty worth +50
reputation from Nobody ending ending at 2019-05-03 15:04:20Z">in 6 days.
One or more of the answers is exemplary and worthy of an additional bounty.
This question has an open bounty worth +50
reputation from Nobody ending ending at 2019-05-03 15:04:20Z">in 6 days.
One or more of the answers is exemplary and worthy of an additional bounty.
13
Uh, what is the single largest (by far) source of both weight and wind resistance for a bicycle (that's being ridden by a human)?
– Daniel R Hicks
Apr 22 at 22:03
9
And concoct an adult-sized bike with 16-inch wheels. Take it out on a highway and ride it 50 miles. Then come back and explain why wheels should be small.
– Daniel R Hicks
Apr 23 at 0:34
5
@Mazura yes, that's what a wheel is. The question was, why one should not be optimized for air resistance and how to explain the wheels that are commonly used in racing.
– ojs
Apr 23 at 5:37
6
@DanielRHicks Or just roll a piece of furniture on casters down the street.
– David Richerby
Apr 23 at 8:35
6
The rule book never explicitly states that bikes are banned for being too good or aerodynamic. They have rules on tube shapes and bike geometries which are to keep the spirit of the sport. A bike being raced today must be recognisably similar to bikes of the past. A recumbent is banned because of this rule. The rule would also prohibit pennyfarthings, so it's not performance.
– Carbon side up
Apr 23 at 8:44
|
show 19 more comments
13
Uh, what is the single largest (by far) source of both weight and wind resistance for a bicycle (that's being ridden by a human)?
– Daniel R Hicks
Apr 22 at 22:03
9
And concoct an adult-sized bike with 16-inch wheels. Take it out on a highway and ride it 50 miles. Then come back and explain why wheels should be small.
– Daniel R Hicks
Apr 23 at 0:34
5
@Mazura yes, that's what a wheel is. The question was, why one should not be optimized for air resistance and how to explain the wheels that are commonly used in racing.
– ojs
Apr 23 at 5:37
6
@DanielRHicks Or just roll a piece of furniture on casters down the street.
– David Richerby
Apr 23 at 8:35
6
The rule book never explicitly states that bikes are banned for being too good or aerodynamic. They have rules on tube shapes and bike geometries which are to keep the spirit of the sport. A bike being raced today must be recognisably similar to bikes of the past. A recumbent is banned because of this rule. The rule would also prohibit pennyfarthings, so it's not performance.
– Carbon side up
Apr 23 at 8:44
13
13
Uh, what is the single largest (by far) source of both weight and wind resistance for a bicycle (that's being ridden by a human)?
– Daniel R Hicks
Apr 22 at 22:03
Uh, what is the single largest (by far) source of both weight and wind resistance for a bicycle (that's being ridden by a human)?
– Daniel R Hicks
Apr 22 at 22:03
9
9
And concoct an adult-sized bike with 16-inch wheels. Take it out on a highway and ride it 50 miles. Then come back and explain why wheels should be small.
– Daniel R Hicks
Apr 23 at 0:34
And concoct an adult-sized bike with 16-inch wheels. Take it out on a highway and ride it 50 miles. Then come back and explain why wheels should be small.
– Daniel R Hicks
Apr 23 at 0:34
5
5
@Mazura yes, that's what a wheel is. The question was, why one should not be optimized for air resistance and how to explain the wheels that are commonly used in racing.
– ojs
Apr 23 at 5:37
@Mazura yes, that's what a wheel is. The question was, why one should not be optimized for air resistance and how to explain the wheels that are commonly used in racing.
– ojs
Apr 23 at 5:37
6
6
@DanielRHicks Or just roll a piece of furniture on casters down the street.
– David Richerby
Apr 23 at 8:35
@DanielRHicks Or just roll a piece of furniture on casters down the street.
– David Richerby
Apr 23 at 8:35
6
6
The rule book never explicitly states that bikes are banned for being too good or aerodynamic. They have rules on tube shapes and bike geometries which are to keep the spirit of the sport. A bike being raced today must be recognisably similar to bikes of the past. A recumbent is banned because of this rule. The rule would also prohibit pennyfarthings, so it's not performance.
– Carbon side up
Apr 23 at 8:44
The rule book never explicitly states that bikes are banned for being too good or aerodynamic. They have rules on tube shapes and bike geometries which are to keep the spirit of the sport. A bike being raced today must be recognisably similar to bikes of the past. A recumbent is banned because of this rule. The rule would also prohibit pennyfarthings, so it's not performance.
– Carbon side up
Apr 23 at 8:44
|
show 19 more comments
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
The boundary layer drag (skin friction) is pretty small at large Reynolds numbers and even if still significant, most of it does not happen on the wheels, but also on the frame and on the rider, so the wheel causes only a small part of the drag (and even of the boundary layer drag). For bluff bodies, and a bicycle (and a rider) is a bluff body, the decisive part of the drag is the form drag, not the skin friction.
As explained in other answers, all other practical factors favour the design of bicycles as we know them. Especially for off road bicycles the aerodynamics is not very important and you can see how bike are designed for handling other capabilities.
Road aerobikes don't really choose to use smaller wheels (although 650 mm wheels are readily available). What is MUCH more important to the drag of the wheels is the tyre width, because that directly changes the form drag. The wider the tyres, the larger the form drag. Other forms of drag are obviously different. I DO know that racers use larger tyres for today's races, that does not invalidate the argument (I use 40 mm tyres myself for touring and gravel). But thin tyres DO offer lower aerodynamical (not rolling) resistance.
In road racing there has been a shift to wider tires over the last few years
– ojs
Apr 23 at 7:31
2
@ojs Indeed, what does that change? Is anything I wrote wrong? Wider tyres lower the rolling resistance, but they definitely DO increase the aerodynamic drag, that is simple physics. They are also heavier. In practice one aims for the fastest bike for the race, not for the bike with the lowest aero resistance or the lowest rolling resistance or whatever. Sometimes that is an aero bike, sometimes a superlight bike, sometimes a cobblestone special bike with suspension, sometimes maybe even a cyclocross bike.
– Vladimir F
Apr 23 at 7:46
The move to wider tyres in racing is much more widely discussed than implemented. While 23mm tyres are all but relics, it's still only the cobbles that will ever see the pros riding anything bigger than a 25. The switch to wider tyres is mostly at the bottom levels of racing still.
– Carbon side up
Apr 23 at 8:39
1
@user2394284 The difference won't be big. The air in the atmosphere is turbulent and even an artificial laminar inflow would quickly generate turbulence while hitting the wheel.
– Vladimir F
Apr 23 at 19:08
1
I'm in Australia, racing against the domestic UCI continental teams and a few Asian teams. I have a couple of friends in the Worldtour who say that it's the same there despite what you'll read online.
– Carbon side up
Apr 24 at 3:16
|
show 2 more comments
Assuming a bicycle with a conventional rider position, the rider cannot be positioned any lower because there has to be a certain amount of clearance between the cranks and the road. As wheels shrink, the frame has to extend downwards to reach the axles, so you are not really removing structure that causes drag, you are replacing it with something else.
Smaller wheels have higher rolling resistance, at some point that become significant compared to aero drag.
There are a host of other practical reasons, for instance:
As the driving wheel decreases in size the gear ratios have to increase to maintain the same distance travelled for a turn of the cranks. This is why folding bikes have huge chainrings.
Small wheels are less stable, as anyone who has ridden a Razor scooter knows.
5
Has anyone done research on what the optimum wheel diameter for bicycles on flat roads with smooth tarmac surface is? It’s rather strange that it’s pretty much only 622mm wheels for all disciplines and riders.
– Michael
Apr 23 at 17:13
4
@Michael This id a good question, and you should probably ask it as a new question, referring to this one.
– Argenti Apparatus
Apr 23 at 17:16
3
@Michael 650(B,C) are relatively common, though not vastly different from 700C. Many recumbents use smaller wheels, and of course they have different ergonomic aspects - the human factor that's part of the trade-off in any real system. Again, an interesting question in its own right
– Chris H
Apr 23 at 20:50
I'm aware that I'm replacing a structure that causes drag with something else, but I'm convinced that it has a (small) benefit! What I'm looking for in an answer are arguments for or against this.
– user2394284
11 hours ago
add a comment |
You also have to count for stuff you can get over - that's why 29-inch wheels are so popular with the mountain bike crowd these days. They suck at cornering, and that's why they came up with 27.5's. Smaller wheel diameters are great for accelerating quicker, hence the popularity of 650C wheel sets for triathlons. Scooters have tiny wheels because they ideally are ridden on paved roads or sidewalks, and can therefore get by without hitting any major potholes or bumps. At some point, people got together and determined an ideal threshold for wheel size that would prevent accidents by their sole ability to get over stuff. That's the best explanation I've got!
4
I understood that cycling leg in triathlon involves accelerating once and riding 180km in straight line. Acceleration would be more important in track and mass start racing.
– ojs
Apr 23 at 5:27
5
@ChrisH triathlon still does not have sprints or breakaways where acceleration would be far more important
– ojs
Apr 23 at 6:31
5
Triathlon is much more diverse than these comments suggest. There are many different distances and styles involved. An Iron Man triathlon has a 112 mile solo effort, where TT/tri bikes are allowed, but drafting is forbidden. Olympic distance and sprint triathlon both involve regular drop bar bikes, and bunch riding on shorter courses. Overall, short sharp acceleration is much less important across all tri disciplines than it is in road racing though.
– Carbon side up
Apr 23 at 8:36
6
Smaller wheel diameters are great for accelerating quicker, hence the popularity of 650C wheel sets for triathlons. I've got to jump into the chorus of everyone saying, "Huh?!?!" to that. Triathlons don't have attacks that racers have to suddenly accelerate to jump onto, they don't have breakaways where the riders covering the break have to work hard with lots of sharp accelerations in order to screw up any attempts to bridge up to the break, and triathlons sure don't have mass-finish sprints with rapid acceleration up to 40+ mph/60+ kph.
– Andrew Henle
Apr 23 at 10:19
4
(cont) And there's nothing in triathlons like a highly technical criterium in an urban setting with 8 or 12 tight 90-degree (or sharper...) turns for each .6 mile/1 km (or less...) lap - with a race being maybe 30 or 40 laps. No one racing a triathlon ever got "accordianed off the back of the pack" from repeated rapid deceleration/acceleration that causes riders to blow up and that can happen at the rear of the peloton in such a race.
– Andrew Henle
Apr 23 at 10:22
|
show 3 more comments
20 inch wheels accelerate faster than larger wheels like 700c. However, the distance traveled is less at the same gear ratios.
New contributor
add a comment |
Have you ever played with a toy Gyroscope? The same principal is in play with a bicycle. A small wheel would have a similar affect to not moving, i.e. not stable.
As a larger wheel spins up, it keeps the bicycle upright.
New contributor
15
Gyroscopic forces don't contribute significantly to bicycle stability, unless you're going very fast. If the gyroscopic forces really were significant, then trying to steer would throw you off. Kooijman et al., (A Bicycle Can Be Self-Stable Without Gyroscopic or Caster Effects, Science 332(6027):339-342, 2011) describe a bike modified to have extra contra-rotating wheels to cancel out the gyro forces. It was completely stable.
– David Richerby
Apr 23 at 13:42
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "126"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
user2394284 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fbicycles.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f60483%2fwhy-arent-road-bicycle-wheels-tiny%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
The boundary layer drag (skin friction) is pretty small at large Reynolds numbers and even if still significant, most of it does not happen on the wheels, but also on the frame and on the rider, so the wheel causes only a small part of the drag (and even of the boundary layer drag). For bluff bodies, and a bicycle (and a rider) is a bluff body, the decisive part of the drag is the form drag, not the skin friction.
As explained in other answers, all other practical factors favour the design of bicycles as we know them. Especially for off road bicycles the aerodynamics is not very important and you can see how bike are designed for handling other capabilities.
Road aerobikes don't really choose to use smaller wheels (although 650 mm wheels are readily available). What is MUCH more important to the drag of the wheels is the tyre width, because that directly changes the form drag. The wider the tyres, the larger the form drag. Other forms of drag are obviously different. I DO know that racers use larger tyres for today's races, that does not invalidate the argument (I use 40 mm tyres myself for touring and gravel). But thin tyres DO offer lower aerodynamical (not rolling) resistance.
In road racing there has been a shift to wider tires over the last few years
– ojs
Apr 23 at 7:31
2
@ojs Indeed, what does that change? Is anything I wrote wrong? Wider tyres lower the rolling resistance, but they definitely DO increase the aerodynamic drag, that is simple physics. They are also heavier. In practice one aims for the fastest bike for the race, not for the bike with the lowest aero resistance or the lowest rolling resistance or whatever. Sometimes that is an aero bike, sometimes a superlight bike, sometimes a cobblestone special bike with suspension, sometimes maybe even a cyclocross bike.
– Vladimir F
Apr 23 at 7:46
The move to wider tyres in racing is much more widely discussed than implemented. While 23mm tyres are all but relics, it's still only the cobbles that will ever see the pros riding anything bigger than a 25. The switch to wider tyres is mostly at the bottom levels of racing still.
– Carbon side up
Apr 23 at 8:39
1
@user2394284 The difference won't be big. The air in the atmosphere is turbulent and even an artificial laminar inflow would quickly generate turbulence while hitting the wheel.
– Vladimir F
Apr 23 at 19:08
1
I'm in Australia, racing against the domestic UCI continental teams and a few Asian teams. I have a couple of friends in the Worldtour who say that it's the same there despite what you'll read online.
– Carbon side up
Apr 24 at 3:16
|
show 2 more comments
The boundary layer drag (skin friction) is pretty small at large Reynolds numbers and even if still significant, most of it does not happen on the wheels, but also on the frame and on the rider, so the wheel causes only a small part of the drag (and even of the boundary layer drag). For bluff bodies, and a bicycle (and a rider) is a bluff body, the decisive part of the drag is the form drag, not the skin friction.
As explained in other answers, all other practical factors favour the design of bicycles as we know them. Especially for off road bicycles the aerodynamics is not very important and you can see how bike are designed for handling other capabilities.
Road aerobikes don't really choose to use smaller wheels (although 650 mm wheels are readily available). What is MUCH more important to the drag of the wheels is the tyre width, because that directly changes the form drag. The wider the tyres, the larger the form drag. Other forms of drag are obviously different. I DO know that racers use larger tyres for today's races, that does not invalidate the argument (I use 40 mm tyres myself for touring and gravel). But thin tyres DO offer lower aerodynamical (not rolling) resistance.
In road racing there has been a shift to wider tires over the last few years
– ojs
Apr 23 at 7:31
2
@ojs Indeed, what does that change? Is anything I wrote wrong? Wider tyres lower the rolling resistance, but they definitely DO increase the aerodynamic drag, that is simple physics. They are also heavier. In practice one aims for the fastest bike for the race, not for the bike with the lowest aero resistance or the lowest rolling resistance or whatever. Sometimes that is an aero bike, sometimes a superlight bike, sometimes a cobblestone special bike with suspension, sometimes maybe even a cyclocross bike.
– Vladimir F
Apr 23 at 7:46
The move to wider tyres in racing is much more widely discussed than implemented. While 23mm tyres are all but relics, it's still only the cobbles that will ever see the pros riding anything bigger than a 25. The switch to wider tyres is mostly at the bottom levels of racing still.
– Carbon side up
Apr 23 at 8:39
1
@user2394284 The difference won't be big. The air in the atmosphere is turbulent and even an artificial laminar inflow would quickly generate turbulence while hitting the wheel.
– Vladimir F
Apr 23 at 19:08
1
I'm in Australia, racing against the domestic UCI continental teams and a few Asian teams. I have a couple of friends in the Worldtour who say that it's the same there despite what you'll read online.
– Carbon side up
Apr 24 at 3:16
|
show 2 more comments
The boundary layer drag (skin friction) is pretty small at large Reynolds numbers and even if still significant, most of it does not happen on the wheels, but also on the frame and on the rider, so the wheel causes only a small part of the drag (and even of the boundary layer drag). For bluff bodies, and a bicycle (and a rider) is a bluff body, the decisive part of the drag is the form drag, not the skin friction.
As explained in other answers, all other practical factors favour the design of bicycles as we know them. Especially for off road bicycles the aerodynamics is not very important and you can see how bike are designed for handling other capabilities.
Road aerobikes don't really choose to use smaller wheels (although 650 mm wheels are readily available). What is MUCH more important to the drag of the wheels is the tyre width, because that directly changes the form drag. The wider the tyres, the larger the form drag. Other forms of drag are obviously different. I DO know that racers use larger tyres for today's races, that does not invalidate the argument (I use 40 mm tyres myself for touring and gravel). But thin tyres DO offer lower aerodynamical (not rolling) resistance.
The boundary layer drag (skin friction) is pretty small at large Reynolds numbers and even if still significant, most of it does not happen on the wheels, but also on the frame and on the rider, so the wheel causes only a small part of the drag (and even of the boundary layer drag). For bluff bodies, and a bicycle (and a rider) is a bluff body, the decisive part of the drag is the form drag, not the skin friction.
As explained in other answers, all other practical factors favour the design of bicycles as we know them. Especially for off road bicycles the aerodynamics is not very important and you can see how bike are designed for handling other capabilities.
Road aerobikes don't really choose to use smaller wheels (although 650 mm wheels are readily available). What is MUCH more important to the drag of the wheels is the tyre width, because that directly changes the form drag. The wider the tyres, the larger the form drag. Other forms of drag are obviously different. I DO know that racers use larger tyres for today's races, that does not invalidate the argument (I use 40 mm tyres myself for touring and gravel). But thin tyres DO offer lower aerodynamical (not rolling) resistance.
edited Apr 23 at 8:41
answered Apr 23 at 7:18
Vladimir FVladimir F
472211
472211
In road racing there has been a shift to wider tires over the last few years
– ojs
Apr 23 at 7:31
2
@ojs Indeed, what does that change? Is anything I wrote wrong? Wider tyres lower the rolling resistance, but they definitely DO increase the aerodynamic drag, that is simple physics. They are also heavier. In practice one aims for the fastest bike for the race, not for the bike with the lowest aero resistance or the lowest rolling resistance or whatever. Sometimes that is an aero bike, sometimes a superlight bike, sometimes a cobblestone special bike with suspension, sometimes maybe even a cyclocross bike.
– Vladimir F
Apr 23 at 7:46
The move to wider tyres in racing is much more widely discussed than implemented. While 23mm tyres are all but relics, it's still only the cobbles that will ever see the pros riding anything bigger than a 25. The switch to wider tyres is mostly at the bottom levels of racing still.
– Carbon side up
Apr 23 at 8:39
1
@user2394284 The difference won't be big. The air in the atmosphere is turbulent and even an artificial laminar inflow would quickly generate turbulence while hitting the wheel.
– Vladimir F
Apr 23 at 19:08
1
I'm in Australia, racing against the domestic UCI continental teams and a few Asian teams. I have a couple of friends in the Worldtour who say that it's the same there despite what you'll read online.
– Carbon side up
Apr 24 at 3:16
|
show 2 more comments
In road racing there has been a shift to wider tires over the last few years
– ojs
Apr 23 at 7:31
2
@ojs Indeed, what does that change? Is anything I wrote wrong? Wider tyres lower the rolling resistance, but they definitely DO increase the aerodynamic drag, that is simple physics. They are also heavier. In practice one aims for the fastest bike for the race, not for the bike with the lowest aero resistance or the lowest rolling resistance or whatever. Sometimes that is an aero bike, sometimes a superlight bike, sometimes a cobblestone special bike with suspension, sometimes maybe even a cyclocross bike.
– Vladimir F
Apr 23 at 7:46
The move to wider tyres in racing is much more widely discussed than implemented. While 23mm tyres are all but relics, it's still only the cobbles that will ever see the pros riding anything bigger than a 25. The switch to wider tyres is mostly at the bottom levels of racing still.
– Carbon side up
Apr 23 at 8:39
1
@user2394284 The difference won't be big. The air in the atmosphere is turbulent and even an artificial laminar inflow would quickly generate turbulence while hitting the wheel.
– Vladimir F
Apr 23 at 19:08
1
I'm in Australia, racing against the domestic UCI continental teams and a few Asian teams. I have a couple of friends in the Worldtour who say that it's the same there despite what you'll read online.
– Carbon side up
Apr 24 at 3:16
In road racing there has been a shift to wider tires over the last few years
– ojs
Apr 23 at 7:31
In road racing there has been a shift to wider tires over the last few years
– ojs
Apr 23 at 7:31
2
2
@ojs Indeed, what does that change? Is anything I wrote wrong? Wider tyres lower the rolling resistance, but they definitely DO increase the aerodynamic drag, that is simple physics. They are also heavier. In practice one aims for the fastest bike for the race, not for the bike with the lowest aero resistance or the lowest rolling resistance or whatever. Sometimes that is an aero bike, sometimes a superlight bike, sometimes a cobblestone special bike with suspension, sometimes maybe even a cyclocross bike.
– Vladimir F
Apr 23 at 7:46
@ojs Indeed, what does that change? Is anything I wrote wrong? Wider tyres lower the rolling resistance, but they definitely DO increase the aerodynamic drag, that is simple physics. They are also heavier. In practice one aims for the fastest bike for the race, not for the bike with the lowest aero resistance or the lowest rolling resistance or whatever. Sometimes that is an aero bike, sometimes a superlight bike, sometimes a cobblestone special bike with suspension, sometimes maybe even a cyclocross bike.
– Vladimir F
Apr 23 at 7:46
The move to wider tyres in racing is much more widely discussed than implemented. While 23mm tyres are all but relics, it's still only the cobbles that will ever see the pros riding anything bigger than a 25. The switch to wider tyres is mostly at the bottom levels of racing still.
– Carbon side up
Apr 23 at 8:39
The move to wider tyres in racing is much more widely discussed than implemented. While 23mm tyres are all but relics, it's still only the cobbles that will ever see the pros riding anything bigger than a 25. The switch to wider tyres is mostly at the bottom levels of racing still.
– Carbon side up
Apr 23 at 8:39
1
1
@user2394284 The difference won't be big. The air in the atmosphere is turbulent and even an artificial laminar inflow would quickly generate turbulence while hitting the wheel.
– Vladimir F
Apr 23 at 19:08
@user2394284 The difference won't be big. The air in the atmosphere is turbulent and even an artificial laminar inflow would quickly generate turbulence while hitting the wheel.
– Vladimir F
Apr 23 at 19:08
1
1
I'm in Australia, racing against the domestic UCI continental teams and a few Asian teams. I have a couple of friends in the Worldtour who say that it's the same there despite what you'll read online.
– Carbon side up
Apr 24 at 3:16
I'm in Australia, racing against the domestic UCI continental teams and a few Asian teams. I have a couple of friends in the Worldtour who say that it's the same there despite what you'll read online.
– Carbon side up
Apr 24 at 3:16
|
show 2 more comments
Assuming a bicycle with a conventional rider position, the rider cannot be positioned any lower because there has to be a certain amount of clearance between the cranks and the road. As wheels shrink, the frame has to extend downwards to reach the axles, so you are not really removing structure that causes drag, you are replacing it with something else.
Smaller wheels have higher rolling resistance, at some point that become significant compared to aero drag.
There are a host of other practical reasons, for instance:
As the driving wheel decreases in size the gear ratios have to increase to maintain the same distance travelled for a turn of the cranks. This is why folding bikes have huge chainrings.
Small wheels are less stable, as anyone who has ridden a Razor scooter knows.
5
Has anyone done research on what the optimum wheel diameter for bicycles on flat roads with smooth tarmac surface is? It’s rather strange that it’s pretty much only 622mm wheels for all disciplines and riders.
– Michael
Apr 23 at 17:13
4
@Michael This id a good question, and you should probably ask it as a new question, referring to this one.
– Argenti Apparatus
Apr 23 at 17:16
3
@Michael 650(B,C) are relatively common, though not vastly different from 700C. Many recumbents use smaller wheels, and of course they have different ergonomic aspects - the human factor that's part of the trade-off in any real system. Again, an interesting question in its own right
– Chris H
Apr 23 at 20:50
I'm aware that I'm replacing a structure that causes drag with something else, but I'm convinced that it has a (small) benefit! What I'm looking for in an answer are arguments for or against this.
– user2394284
11 hours ago
add a comment |
Assuming a bicycle with a conventional rider position, the rider cannot be positioned any lower because there has to be a certain amount of clearance between the cranks and the road. As wheels shrink, the frame has to extend downwards to reach the axles, so you are not really removing structure that causes drag, you are replacing it with something else.
Smaller wheels have higher rolling resistance, at some point that become significant compared to aero drag.
There are a host of other practical reasons, for instance:
As the driving wheel decreases in size the gear ratios have to increase to maintain the same distance travelled for a turn of the cranks. This is why folding bikes have huge chainrings.
Small wheels are less stable, as anyone who has ridden a Razor scooter knows.
5
Has anyone done research on what the optimum wheel diameter for bicycles on flat roads with smooth tarmac surface is? It’s rather strange that it’s pretty much only 622mm wheels for all disciplines and riders.
– Michael
Apr 23 at 17:13
4
@Michael This id a good question, and you should probably ask it as a new question, referring to this one.
– Argenti Apparatus
Apr 23 at 17:16
3
@Michael 650(B,C) are relatively common, though not vastly different from 700C. Many recumbents use smaller wheels, and of course they have different ergonomic aspects - the human factor that's part of the trade-off in any real system. Again, an interesting question in its own right
– Chris H
Apr 23 at 20:50
I'm aware that I'm replacing a structure that causes drag with something else, but I'm convinced that it has a (small) benefit! What I'm looking for in an answer are arguments for or against this.
– user2394284
11 hours ago
add a comment |
Assuming a bicycle with a conventional rider position, the rider cannot be positioned any lower because there has to be a certain amount of clearance between the cranks and the road. As wheels shrink, the frame has to extend downwards to reach the axles, so you are not really removing structure that causes drag, you are replacing it with something else.
Smaller wheels have higher rolling resistance, at some point that become significant compared to aero drag.
There are a host of other practical reasons, for instance:
As the driving wheel decreases in size the gear ratios have to increase to maintain the same distance travelled for a turn of the cranks. This is why folding bikes have huge chainrings.
Small wheels are less stable, as anyone who has ridden a Razor scooter knows.
Assuming a bicycle with a conventional rider position, the rider cannot be positioned any lower because there has to be a certain amount of clearance between the cranks and the road. As wheels shrink, the frame has to extend downwards to reach the axles, so you are not really removing structure that causes drag, you are replacing it with something else.
Smaller wheels have higher rolling resistance, at some point that become significant compared to aero drag.
There are a host of other practical reasons, for instance:
As the driving wheel decreases in size the gear ratios have to increase to maintain the same distance travelled for a turn of the cranks. This is why folding bikes have huge chainrings.
Small wheels are less stable, as anyone who has ridden a Razor scooter knows.
answered Apr 23 at 1:40
Argenti ApparatusArgenti Apparatus
38.6k34096
38.6k34096
5
Has anyone done research on what the optimum wheel diameter for bicycles on flat roads with smooth tarmac surface is? It’s rather strange that it’s pretty much only 622mm wheels for all disciplines and riders.
– Michael
Apr 23 at 17:13
4
@Michael This id a good question, and you should probably ask it as a new question, referring to this one.
– Argenti Apparatus
Apr 23 at 17:16
3
@Michael 650(B,C) are relatively common, though not vastly different from 700C. Many recumbents use smaller wheels, and of course they have different ergonomic aspects - the human factor that's part of the trade-off in any real system. Again, an interesting question in its own right
– Chris H
Apr 23 at 20:50
I'm aware that I'm replacing a structure that causes drag with something else, but I'm convinced that it has a (small) benefit! What I'm looking for in an answer are arguments for or against this.
– user2394284
11 hours ago
add a comment |
5
Has anyone done research on what the optimum wheel diameter for bicycles on flat roads with smooth tarmac surface is? It’s rather strange that it’s pretty much only 622mm wheels for all disciplines and riders.
– Michael
Apr 23 at 17:13
4
@Michael This id a good question, and you should probably ask it as a new question, referring to this one.
– Argenti Apparatus
Apr 23 at 17:16
3
@Michael 650(B,C) are relatively common, though not vastly different from 700C. Many recumbents use smaller wheels, and of course they have different ergonomic aspects - the human factor that's part of the trade-off in any real system. Again, an interesting question in its own right
– Chris H
Apr 23 at 20:50
I'm aware that I'm replacing a structure that causes drag with something else, but I'm convinced that it has a (small) benefit! What I'm looking for in an answer are arguments for or against this.
– user2394284
11 hours ago
5
5
Has anyone done research on what the optimum wheel diameter for bicycles on flat roads with smooth tarmac surface is? It’s rather strange that it’s pretty much only 622mm wheels for all disciplines and riders.
– Michael
Apr 23 at 17:13
Has anyone done research on what the optimum wheel diameter for bicycles on flat roads with smooth tarmac surface is? It’s rather strange that it’s pretty much only 622mm wheels for all disciplines and riders.
– Michael
Apr 23 at 17:13
4
4
@Michael This id a good question, and you should probably ask it as a new question, referring to this one.
– Argenti Apparatus
Apr 23 at 17:16
@Michael This id a good question, and you should probably ask it as a new question, referring to this one.
– Argenti Apparatus
Apr 23 at 17:16
3
3
@Michael 650(B,C) are relatively common, though not vastly different from 700C. Many recumbents use smaller wheels, and of course they have different ergonomic aspects - the human factor that's part of the trade-off in any real system. Again, an interesting question in its own right
– Chris H
Apr 23 at 20:50
@Michael 650(B,C) are relatively common, though not vastly different from 700C. Many recumbents use smaller wheels, and of course they have different ergonomic aspects - the human factor that's part of the trade-off in any real system. Again, an interesting question in its own right
– Chris H
Apr 23 at 20:50
I'm aware that I'm replacing a structure that causes drag with something else, but I'm convinced that it has a (small) benefit! What I'm looking for in an answer are arguments for or against this.
– user2394284
11 hours ago
I'm aware that I'm replacing a structure that causes drag with something else, but I'm convinced that it has a (small) benefit! What I'm looking for in an answer are arguments for or against this.
– user2394284
11 hours ago
add a comment |
You also have to count for stuff you can get over - that's why 29-inch wheels are so popular with the mountain bike crowd these days. They suck at cornering, and that's why they came up with 27.5's. Smaller wheel diameters are great for accelerating quicker, hence the popularity of 650C wheel sets for triathlons. Scooters have tiny wheels because they ideally are ridden on paved roads or sidewalks, and can therefore get by without hitting any major potholes or bumps. At some point, people got together and determined an ideal threshold for wheel size that would prevent accidents by their sole ability to get over stuff. That's the best explanation I've got!
4
I understood that cycling leg in triathlon involves accelerating once and riding 180km in straight line. Acceleration would be more important in track and mass start racing.
– ojs
Apr 23 at 5:27
5
@ChrisH triathlon still does not have sprints or breakaways where acceleration would be far more important
– ojs
Apr 23 at 6:31
5
Triathlon is much more diverse than these comments suggest. There are many different distances and styles involved. An Iron Man triathlon has a 112 mile solo effort, where TT/tri bikes are allowed, but drafting is forbidden. Olympic distance and sprint triathlon both involve regular drop bar bikes, and bunch riding on shorter courses. Overall, short sharp acceleration is much less important across all tri disciplines than it is in road racing though.
– Carbon side up
Apr 23 at 8:36
6
Smaller wheel diameters are great for accelerating quicker, hence the popularity of 650C wheel sets for triathlons. I've got to jump into the chorus of everyone saying, "Huh?!?!" to that. Triathlons don't have attacks that racers have to suddenly accelerate to jump onto, they don't have breakaways where the riders covering the break have to work hard with lots of sharp accelerations in order to screw up any attempts to bridge up to the break, and triathlons sure don't have mass-finish sprints with rapid acceleration up to 40+ mph/60+ kph.
– Andrew Henle
Apr 23 at 10:19
4
(cont) And there's nothing in triathlons like a highly technical criterium in an urban setting with 8 or 12 tight 90-degree (or sharper...) turns for each .6 mile/1 km (or less...) lap - with a race being maybe 30 or 40 laps. No one racing a triathlon ever got "accordianed off the back of the pack" from repeated rapid deceleration/acceleration that causes riders to blow up and that can happen at the rear of the peloton in such a race.
– Andrew Henle
Apr 23 at 10:22
|
show 3 more comments
You also have to count for stuff you can get over - that's why 29-inch wheels are so popular with the mountain bike crowd these days. They suck at cornering, and that's why they came up with 27.5's. Smaller wheel diameters are great for accelerating quicker, hence the popularity of 650C wheel sets for triathlons. Scooters have tiny wheels because they ideally are ridden on paved roads or sidewalks, and can therefore get by without hitting any major potholes or bumps. At some point, people got together and determined an ideal threshold for wheel size that would prevent accidents by their sole ability to get over stuff. That's the best explanation I've got!
4
I understood that cycling leg in triathlon involves accelerating once and riding 180km in straight line. Acceleration would be more important in track and mass start racing.
– ojs
Apr 23 at 5:27
5
@ChrisH triathlon still does not have sprints or breakaways where acceleration would be far more important
– ojs
Apr 23 at 6:31
5
Triathlon is much more diverse than these comments suggest. There are many different distances and styles involved. An Iron Man triathlon has a 112 mile solo effort, where TT/tri bikes are allowed, but drafting is forbidden. Olympic distance and sprint triathlon both involve regular drop bar bikes, and bunch riding on shorter courses. Overall, short sharp acceleration is much less important across all tri disciplines than it is in road racing though.
– Carbon side up
Apr 23 at 8:36
6
Smaller wheel diameters are great for accelerating quicker, hence the popularity of 650C wheel sets for triathlons. I've got to jump into the chorus of everyone saying, "Huh?!?!" to that. Triathlons don't have attacks that racers have to suddenly accelerate to jump onto, they don't have breakaways where the riders covering the break have to work hard with lots of sharp accelerations in order to screw up any attempts to bridge up to the break, and triathlons sure don't have mass-finish sprints with rapid acceleration up to 40+ mph/60+ kph.
– Andrew Henle
Apr 23 at 10:19
4
(cont) And there's nothing in triathlons like a highly technical criterium in an urban setting with 8 or 12 tight 90-degree (or sharper...) turns for each .6 mile/1 km (or less...) lap - with a race being maybe 30 or 40 laps. No one racing a triathlon ever got "accordianed off the back of the pack" from repeated rapid deceleration/acceleration that causes riders to blow up and that can happen at the rear of the peloton in such a race.
– Andrew Henle
Apr 23 at 10:22
|
show 3 more comments
You also have to count for stuff you can get over - that's why 29-inch wheels are so popular with the mountain bike crowd these days. They suck at cornering, and that's why they came up with 27.5's. Smaller wheel diameters are great for accelerating quicker, hence the popularity of 650C wheel sets for triathlons. Scooters have tiny wheels because they ideally are ridden on paved roads or sidewalks, and can therefore get by without hitting any major potholes or bumps. At some point, people got together and determined an ideal threshold for wheel size that would prevent accidents by their sole ability to get over stuff. That's the best explanation I've got!
You also have to count for stuff you can get over - that's why 29-inch wheels are so popular with the mountain bike crowd these days. They suck at cornering, and that's why they came up with 27.5's. Smaller wheel diameters are great for accelerating quicker, hence the popularity of 650C wheel sets for triathlons. Scooters have tiny wheels because they ideally are ridden on paved roads or sidewalks, and can therefore get by without hitting any major potholes or bumps. At some point, people got together and determined an ideal threshold for wheel size that would prevent accidents by their sole ability to get over stuff. That's the best explanation I've got!
answered Apr 23 at 1:14
M. HernandezM. Hernandez
1154
1154
4
I understood that cycling leg in triathlon involves accelerating once and riding 180km in straight line. Acceleration would be more important in track and mass start racing.
– ojs
Apr 23 at 5:27
5
@ChrisH triathlon still does not have sprints or breakaways where acceleration would be far more important
– ojs
Apr 23 at 6:31
5
Triathlon is much more diverse than these comments suggest. There are many different distances and styles involved. An Iron Man triathlon has a 112 mile solo effort, where TT/tri bikes are allowed, but drafting is forbidden. Olympic distance and sprint triathlon both involve regular drop bar bikes, and bunch riding on shorter courses. Overall, short sharp acceleration is much less important across all tri disciplines than it is in road racing though.
– Carbon side up
Apr 23 at 8:36
6
Smaller wheel diameters are great for accelerating quicker, hence the popularity of 650C wheel sets for triathlons. I've got to jump into the chorus of everyone saying, "Huh?!?!" to that. Triathlons don't have attacks that racers have to suddenly accelerate to jump onto, they don't have breakaways where the riders covering the break have to work hard with lots of sharp accelerations in order to screw up any attempts to bridge up to the break, and triathlons sure don't have mass-finish sprints with rapid acceleration up to 40+ mph/60+ kph.
– Andrew Henle
Apr 23 at 10:19
4
(cont) And there's nothing in triathlons like a highly technical criterium in an urban setting with 8 or 12 tight 90-degree (or sharper...) turns for each .6 mile/1 km (or less...) lap - with a race being maybe 30 or 40 laps. No one racing a triathlon ever got "accordianed off the back of the pack" from repeated rapid deceleration/acceleration that causes riders to blow up and that can happen at the rear of the peloton in such a race.
– Andrew Henle
Apr 23 at 10:22
|
show 3 more comments
4
I understood that cycling leg in triathlon involves accelerating once and riding 180km in straight line. Acceleration would be more important in track and mass start racing.
– ojs
Apr 23 at 5:27
5
@ChrisH triathlon still does not have sprints or breakaways where acceleration would be far more important
– ojs
Apr 23 at 6:31
5
Triathlon is much more diverse than these comments suggest. There are many different distances and styles involved. An Iron Man triathlon has a 112 mile solo effort, where TT/tri bikes are allowed, but drafting is forbidden. Olympic distance and sprint triathlon both involve regular drop bar bikes, and bunch riding on shorter courses. Overall, short sharp acceleration is much less important across all tri disciplines than it is in road racing though.
– Carbon side up
Apr 23 at 8:36
6
Smaller wheel diameters are great for accelerating quicker, hence the popularity of 650C wheel sets for triathlons. I've got to jump into the chorus of everyone saying, "Huh?!?!" to that. Triathlons don't have attacks that racers have to suddenly accelerate to jump onto, they don't have breakaways where the riders covering the break have to work hard with lots of sharp accelerations in order to screw up any attempts to bridge up to the break, and triathlons sure don't have mass-finish sprints with rapid acceleration up to 40+ mph/60+ kph.
– Andrew Henle
Apr 23 at 10:19
4
(cont) And there's nothing in triathlons like a highly technical criterium in an urban setting with 8 or 12 tight 90-degree (or sharper...) turns for each .6 mile/1 km (or less...) lap - with a race being maybe 30 or 40 laps. No one racing a triathlon ever got "accordianed off the back of the pack" from repeated rapid deceleration/acceleration that causes riders to blow up and that can happen at the rear of the peloton in such a race.
– Andrew Henle
Apr 23 at 10:22
4
4
I understood that cycling leg in triathlon involves accelerating once and riding 180km in straight line. Acceleration would be more important in track and mass start racing.
– ojs
Apr 23 at 5:27
I understood that cycling leg in triathlon involves accelerating once and riding 180km in straight line. Acceleration would be more important in track and mass start racing.
– ojs
Apr 23 at 5:27
5
5
@ChrisH triathlon still does not have sprints or breakaways where acceleration would be far more important
– ojs
Apr 23 at 6:31
@ChrisH triathlon still does not have sprints or breakaways where acceleration would be far more important
– ojs
Apr 23 at 6:31
5
5
Triathlon is much more diverse than these comments suggest. There are many different distances and styles involved. An Iron Man triathlon has a 112 mile solo effort, where TT/tri bikes are allowed, but drafting is forbidden. Olympic distance and sprint triathlon both involve regular drop bar bikes, and bunch riding on shorter courses. Overall, short sharp acceleration is much less important across all tri disciplines than it is in road racing though.
– Carbon side up
Apr 23 at 8:36
Triathlon is much more diverse than these comments suggest. There are many different distances and styles involved. An Iron Man triathlon has a 112 mile solo effort, where TT/tri bikes are allowed, but drafting is forbidden. Olympic distance and sprint triathlon both involve regular drop bar bikes, and bunch riding on shorter courses. Overall, short sharp acceleration is much less important across all tri disciplines than it is in road racing though.
– Carbon side up
Apr 23 at 8:36
6
6
Smaller wheel diameters are great for accelerating quicker, hence the popularity of 650C wheel sets for triathlons. I've got to jump into the chorus of everyone saying, "Huh?!?!" to that. Triathlons don't have attacks that racers have to suddenly accelerate to jump onto, they don't have breakaways where the riders covering the break have to work hard with lots of sharp accelerations in order to screw up any attempts to bridge up to the break, and triathlons sure don't have mass-finish sprints with rapid acceleration up to 40+ mph/60+ kph.
– Andrew Henle
Apr 23 at 10:19
Smaller wheel diameters are great for accelerating quicker, hence the popularity of 650C wheel sets for triathlons. I've got to jump into the chorus of everyone saying, "Huh?!?!" to that. Triathlons don't have attacks that racers have to suddenly accelerate to jump onto, they don't have breakaways where the riders covering the break have to work hard with lots of sharp accelerations in order to screw up any attempts to bridge up to the break, and triathlons sure don't have mass-finish sprints with rapid acceleration up to 40+ mph/60+ kph.
– Andrew Henle
Apr 23 at 10:19
4
4
(cont) And there's nothing in triathlons like a highly technical criterium in an urban setting with 8 or 12 tight 90-degree (or sharper...) turns for each .6 mile/1 km (or less...) lap - with a race being maybe 30 or 40 laps. No one racing a triathlon ever got "accordianed off the back of the pack" from repeated rapid deceleration/acceleration that causes riders to blow up and that can happen at the rear of the peloton in such a race.
– Andrew Henle
Apr 23 at 10:22
(cont) And there's nothing in triathlons like a highly technical criterium in an urban setting with 8 or 12 tight 90-degree (or sharper...) turns for each .6 mile/1 km (or less...) lap - with a race being maybe 30 or 40 laps. No one racing a triathlon ever got "accordianed off the back of the pack" from repeated rapid deceleration/acceleration that causes riders to blow up and that can happen at the rear of the peloton in such a race.
– Andrew Henle
Apr 23 at 10:22
|
show 3 more comments
20 inch wheels accelerate faster than larger wheels like 700c. However, the distance traveled is less at the same gear ratios.
New contributor
add a comment |
20 inch wheels accelerate faster than larger wheels like 700c. However, the distance traveled is less at the same gear ratios.
New contributor
add a comment |
20 inch wheels accelerate faster than larger wheels like 700c. However, the distance traveled is less at the same gear ratios.
New contributor
20 inch wheels accelerate faster than larger wheels like 700c. However, the distance traveled is less at the same gear ratios.
New contributor
New contributor
answered Apr 23 at 17:31
Mark ConnellyMark Connelly
7
7
New contributor
New contributor
add a comment |
add a comment |
Have you ever played with a toy Gyroscope? The same principal is in play with a bicycle. A small wheel would have a similar affect to not moving, i.e. not stable.
As a larger wheel spins up, it keeps the bicycle upright.
New contributor
15
Gyroscopic forces don't contribute significantly to bicycle stability, unless you're going very fast. If the gyroscopic forces really were significant, then trying to steer would throw you off. Kooijman et al., (A Bicycle Can Be Self-Stable Without Gyroscopic or Caster Effects, Science 332(6027):339-342, 2011) describe a bike modified to have extra contra-rotating wheels to cancel out the gyro forces. It was completely stable.
– David Richerby
Apr 23 at 13:42
add a comment |
Have you ever played with a toy Gyroscope? The same principal is in play with a bicycle. A small wheel would have a similar affect to not moving, i.e. not stable.
As a larger wheel spins up, it keeps the bicycle upright.
New contributor
15
Gyroscopic forces don't contribute significantly to bicycle stability, unless you're going very fast. If the gyroscopic forces really were significant, then trying to steer would throw you off. Kooijman et al., (A Bicycle Can Be Self-Stable Without Gyroscopic or Caster Effects, Science 332(6027):339-342, 2011) describe a bike modified to have extra contra-rotating wheels to cancel out the gyro forces. It was completely stable.
– David Richerby
Apr 23 at 13:42
add a comment |
Have you ever played with a toy Gyroscope? The same principal is in play with a bicycle. A small wheel would have a similar affect to not moving, i.e. not stable.
As a larger wheel spins up, it keeps the bicycle upright.
New contributor
Have you ever played with a toy Gyroscope? The same principal is in play with a bicycle. A small wheel would have a similar affect to not moving, i.e. not stable.
As a larger wheel spins up, it keeps the bicycle upright.
New contributor
New contributor
answered Apr 23 at 11:50
fatboy_slimfastfatboy_slimfast
51
51
New contributor
New contributor
15
Gyroscopic forces don't contribute significantly to bicycle stability, unless you're going very fast. If the gyroscopic forces really were significant, then trying to steer would throw you off. Kooijman et al., (A Bicycle Can Be Self-Stable Without Gyroscopic or Caster Effects, Science 332(6027):339-342, 2011) describe a bike modified to have extra contra-rotating wheels to cancel out the gyro forces. It was completely stable.
– David Richerby
Apr 23 at 13:42
add a comment |
15
Gyroscopic forces don't contribute significantly to bicycle stability, unless you're going very fast. If the gyroscopic forces really were significant, then trying to steer would throw you off. Kooijman et al., (A Bicycle Can Be Self-Stable Without Gyroscopic or Caster Effects, Science 332(6027):339-342, 2011) describe a bike modified to have extra contra-rotating wheels to cancel out the gyro forces. It was completely stable.
– David Richerby
Apr 23 at 13:42
15
15
Gyroscopic forces don't contribute significantly to bicycle stability, unless you're going very fast. If the gyroscopic forces really were significant, then trying to steer would throw you off. Kooijman et al., (A Bicycle Can Be Self-Stable Without Gyroscopic or Caster Effects, Science 332(6027):339-342, 2011) describe a bike modified to have extra contra-rotating wheels to cancel out the gyro forces. It was completely stable.
– David Richerby
Apr 23 at 13:42
Gyroscopic forces don't contribute significantly to bicycle stability, unless you're going very fast. If the gyroscopic forces really were significant, then trying to steer would throw you off. Kooijman et al., (A Bicycle Can Be Self-Stable Without Gyroscopic or Caster Effects, Science 332(6027):339-342, 2011) describe a bike modified to have extra contra-rotating wheels to cancel out the gyro forces. It was completely stable.
– David Richerby
Apr 23 at 13:42
add a comment |
user2394284 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
user2394284 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
user2394284 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
user2394284 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to Bicycles Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fbicycles.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f60483%2fwhy-arent-road-bicycle-wheels-tiny%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
13
Uh, what is the single largest (by far) source of both weight and wind resistance for a bicycle (that's being ridden by a human)?
– Daniel R Hicks
Apr 22 at 22:03
9
And concoct an adult-sized bike with 16-inch wheels. Take it out on a highway and ride it 50 miles. Then come back and explain why wheels should be small.
– Daniel R Hicks
Apr 23 at 0:34
5
@Mazura yes, that's what a wheel is. The question was, why one should not be optimized for air resistance and how to explain the wheels that are commonly used in racing.
– ojs
Apr 23 at 5:37
6
@DanielRHicks Or just roll a piece of furniture on casters down the street.
– David Richerby
Apr 23 at 8:35
6
The rule book never explicitly states that bikes are banned for being too good or aerodynamic. They have rules on tube shapes and bike geometries which are to keep the spirit of the sport. A bike being raced today must be recognisably similar to bikes of the past. A recumbent is banned because of this rule. The rule would also prohibit pennyfarthings, so it's not performance.
– Carbon side up
Apr 23 at 8:44