# Can we just admit that Aero helmets are stupid?



## pulser955 (Apr 18, 2009)

Looks like Specialized is continuing to make the worst looking helmets on the market. 

Specialized S-Works Evade Aero Helmet Launched - BikeRadar

I personally would like it if we could move past this trend quickly so we can look back on it much like we do 80's hair.


----------



## Zeet (Mar 24, 2013)

Personally, I like 'em!


----------



## cale262 (Apr 28, 2010)

Not my choice of skid lid but this is much better looking than the latest offering from Giro...not that that is saying much as both are ugly IMHO, YMMV.


----------



## velodog (Sep 26, 2007)

They're just making it harder and harder to even use a helmet.

But there are two choices

1-Don't use a helmet

2-Don't look in a mirror.


One's PC, the other ain't. The choice is yours.


----------



## Rhymenocerus (Jul 17, 2010)

If by stupid you mean fast, then yes.


----------



## pulser955 (Apr 18, 2009)

Rhymenocerus said:


> If by stupid you mean fast, then yes.


O god can we not have this argument? The aero advantage is totally useless to 90% of the people riding bikes. I will concede that it might help a pro.


----------



## Rhymenocerus (Jul 17, 2010)

pulser955 said:


> O god can we not have this argument? The aero advantage is totally useless to 90% of the people riding bikes. I will concede that it might help a pro.


I do TTs in hot weather, im certainly interested in this. However im not paying 250 for some styrofoam. Ill just electrical tape most of my vents at events like usual.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

Rhymenocerus said:


> I do TTs in hot weather, im certainly interested in this. However im not paying 250 for some styrofoam. Ill just electrical tape most of my vents at events like usual.


Duct tape works at 200 mph. Nascar.


----------



## masont (Feb 6, 2010)

90% of people won't touch this helmet because of the price anyway. I'm pretty sure Specialized is going after the top of the market with this $250 aero race helmet. Not someone who's buying a $25 Bell from Costco. 

It is faster for some people. There is no question there. It's a question of if it's worth it for people, and that's not a question I can answer for anybody else but me.


----------



## Zeet (Mar 24, 2013)

I can't really see a helmet making you a faster racer...I would think you'd have a better chance of winning, if you had bypassed that slice of German Chocolate cake for dessert, last night!


----------



## tihsepa (Nov 27, 2008)

Zeet said:


> Personally, I like 'em!


You are 80 years old. What difference does it make?

My vote? They are lame looking. But I am in the 95% of people who dont matter anyway.


----------



## Hooben (Aug 22, 2004)

What? Another ugly helmet. I'm sure it will make a big splash and sell to the masses in the millions.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

Zeet said:


> *I can't really see a helmet making you a faster racer*...I would think you'd have a better chance of winning, if you had bypassed that slice of German Chocolate cake for dessert, last night!


You can't argue w/ physics. All else being equal, you'd be faster. By a very, very, very small margin.


----------



## Ventruck (Mar 9, 2009)

Zeet said:


> I can't really see a helmet making you a faster racer.


plz, indulge us in your scientific and arbitrary reasoning based off substantial amounts of qualitative experience.


----------



## redondoaveb (Jan 16, 2011)

Ventruck said:


> plz, indulge us in your scientific and arbitrary reasoning based off substantial amounts of qualitative experience.


No, really. TT racers just wear the aero helmets because they like the looks of them.


----------



## Retro Grouch (Apr 30, 2002)

Wearing this may also give you an aero advantage too!










It also comes in handy should you become bedridden from a crash.

Sorry...no carbon fiber model on the market yet.


----------



## forge55b (Jan 30, 2011)

aerodynamics of head = bad

aerodynamics of head with aero helmet = not as bad


----------



## SFTifoso (Aug 17, 2011)

I would just the Kask Bambino. At least that looks pretty cool with the visor on.

View attachment 283198


----------



## Zeet (Mar 24, 2013)

Zeet said:


> I can't really see a helmet making you a faster racer...I would think you'd have a better chance of winning, if you had bypassed that slice of German Chocolate cake for dessert, last night!


Well, I really should've qualified this statement. Let's just say that, I really can't see how a helmet can make you that much faster of a racer. Given it's lack of air resistance, due to its streamline design, such a helmet has just got to contribute to the increase in the cyclist's velocity, but I really do question to what degree it does...


----------



## Zeet (Mar 24, 2013)

tihsepa said:


> You are 80 years old. What difference does it make?
> 
> My vote? They are lame looking. But I am in the 95% of people who dont matter anyway.


I'm not eighty years old, I'm a few years older than eighty. I've already told you! Can't you remember anything? You little young whipper snapper you!


----------



## bvber (Apr 23, 2011)

Zeet said:


> Well, I really should've qualified this statement. Let's just say that, I really can't see how a helmet can make you that much faster of a racer. Given it's lack of air resistance, due to its streamline design, such a helmet has just got to contribute to the increase in the cyclist's velocity, but I really do question to what degree it does it...


The little things make all the difference for Mark Cavendish ...


----------



## c_h_i_n_a_m_a_n (Mar 3, 2012)

Some will like the small difference that it makes. Makes them feel better and go quicker too.

Manufacturers will need to come with new ideas every now and then. Eventually there will cheaper versions of similar design. Then as more and more people pick it up, it will look to be the norm. You will be too old by then. New kids will only be exposed to riders wearing such lids and they see that as the norm. Then large vents will be like what 80s are to some of you. Then manufacturers will come up with new designs and the new kids who are much older now, will just sneer at them again.

If you do notice, there are still oldies on road bikes that do not wear any helmets? They come from an era where pro riders do not wear any helmet and they just do not like it.

It is all about personal choice and that is moulded from what you experience both visually and from your gain in knowledge.


----------



## Zeet (Mar 24, 2013)

cxwrench said:


> You can't argue w/ physics. All else being equal, you'd be faster. By a very, very, very small margin.


Yeah, but the greater the distance, the larger the margin!


----------



## Hughsdad (Jan 21, 2011)

Zeet said:


> Well, I really should've qualified this statement. Let's just say that, I really can't see how a helmet can make you that much faster of a racer. Given it's lack of air resistance, due to its streamline design, such a helmet has just got to contribute to the increase in the cyclist's velocity, but I really do question to what degree it does...


10 watts at 40km/h is not insignificant.


----------



## junior1210 (May 2, 2013)

SFTifoso said:


> I would just the Kask Bambino. At least that looks pretty cool with the visor on.
> 
> View attachment 283198


Judge Dredd called and said he wants his helmet back........NOW!


----------



## SauronHimself (Nov 21, 2012)

An aero road helmet will provide more benefit than the most expensive aero wheels.


----------



## deviousalex (Aug 18, 2010)

From the BikeRadar article

In a 200m sprint at 1,000 Watts – an output approaching that which the pros can achieve – Specialized claim it gives a 2.6m improvement.

2.6m is HUGE. I've lost 5 places in 2.6 meters before. Also, most Cat 2 sprinters I know can do 1,000 watt sprints as well so this is relevant to the average racer.


----------



## Cyclin Dan (Sep 24, 2011)

junior1210 said:


> Judge Dredd called and said he wants his helmet back........NOW!


That made me laugh...hard.


----------



## pulser955 (Apr 18, 2009)

deviousalex said:


> From the BikeRadar article
> 
> In a 200m sprint at 1,000 Watts – an output approaching that which the pros can achieve – Specialized claim it gives a 2.6m improvement.
> 
> 2.6m is HUGE. I've lost 5 places in 2.6 meters before. Also, most Cat 2 sprinters I know can do 1,000 watt sprints as well so this is relevant to the average racer.


And that's grate if you only sprint in wind tunnels. Hence why aero helmets are stupid.


----------



## deviousalex (Aug 18, 2010)

pulser955 said:


> And that's grate if you only sprint in wind tunnels. Hence why aero helmets are stupid.


Is wind in a windtunnel somehow different from wind outside? Are the air molecules thinking "Let's screw with the data and go REALLY hard this time!" I've been in a road race with a bad wind where I was pushing 270 watts to go 17mph on a flat road. I would have loved one of those helmets then.


----------



## pulser955 (Apr 18, 2009)

deviousalex said:


> Is wind in a windtunnel somehow different from wind outside? Are the air molecules thinking "Let's screw with the data and go REALLY hard this time!" I've been in a road race with a bad wind where I was pushing 270 watts to go 17mph on a flat road. I would have loved one of those helmets then.


You don't race in clean air aero helmets are useless outside of totally clean air in a wind tunnel environment. That's why they are stupid and mostly marketing.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

pulser955 said:


> You don't race in clean air aero helmets are useless outside of totally clean air in a wind tunnel environment. That's why they are stupid and mostly marketing.


Do you have ANY clue at all about bike racing? Any clue? Even just a little one...?


----------



## pulser955 (Apr 18, 2009)

cxwrench said:


> Do you have ANY clue at all about bike racing? Any clue? Even just a little one...?


Actually yes I do I race. And unless you are in clean air I can't see how it will do any good. With all the turbulent air coming off every thing around you and the wind that can be from any direction its useless.


----------



## RRRoubaix (Aug 27, 2008)

It looks a helluva lot better than that skate-park abomination from Giro.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

pulser955 said:


> Actually yes I do I race. And unless you are in clean air I can't see how it will do any good. With all the turbulent air coming off every thing around you and the wind that can be from any direction its useless.


What kind of wheels are you using?


----------



## pulser955 (Apr 18, 2009)

cxwrench said:


> What kind of wheels are you using?


Campy Zondas


----------



## Bigfred* (Jun 29, 2013)

pulser955 said:


> Actually yes I do I race. And unless you are in clean air I can't see how it will do any good. With all the turbulent air coming off every thing around you and the wind that can be from any direction its useless.


If you aren't acustomed to being in clean air I can understand your perspective. The men who are acustomed to being "at the front" of the peleton may have another perspective. Seems to me, they might just be seeing some of this "clean air" you're not familiar with.


----------



## looigi (Nov 24, 2010)

If a helmet fits well and ventilates well, there's no sense it not be aero. Marcel Kittel, winner of stage 1 yesterday, was wearing an aero Uvex. To his right in the final sprint to the line was a Katusha rider with an Air Attack. Further behind the Katusha rider is a white and green aero helmet. Of course Cavendish crashed out of the final sprint but his team and others were wearing the Specialized Evade aero helmet. You may argue that Pros use what the get paid to use, but they only get paid in the first place because they produce results. They don't use stuff that hinders their performance, to the point of relabeling things they think they need to perform.

From what I know about aerodynamics and cooling from the aviation and transportation industries, it's about time helmets are starting catch up. They may have looked futuristic, but they've been 50 years behind the times.

From the purely cosmetic point of view, I agree the Evade looks ludicrous.

View attachment 283239


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

pulser955 said:


> Actually yes I do I race. And unless you are in clean air I can't see how it will do any good. With all the turbulent air coming off every thing around you and the wind that can be from any direction its useless.


Can you explain how a less aerodynamic object like a helmet is no longer less aerodynamic in "dirty" air (as in riding in the draft of others)?


When riding in the draft of others, you are not necessarily seeking to gain speed, but rather to reduce further the energy required to maintain your position. Saving energy is crucial in order to have more energy to use when it really matters, like the final sprint, or on a cumulative basis in a stage race.

A great example might be team pursuit riders. Recovery while in the line is critical to the ability to have the energy to maintain speed when doing a turn, or indeed not cracking early. The aero helmets work while in the draft as well as when on the front.

Then of course to win a race or help someone else to win a race, you are presumably in clean air at some crucial stage and getting more speed for the power you have is presumably advantageous.


As for regular time/speed gains, I've coached 3 world masters hour records, and have performed aerodynamics testing for many people. In a lot of tests we test the aerodynamic differences of various helmets on the riders.

For one of my hour record clients, the difference for him between two different _aero _helmets was over a kilometre on his hour record.

For some people, due to position and morphology, the differences can of course be somewhat less, but they do exist. Been testing quite a few helmets lately, and there are significant differences between aero helmets, let alone with standard vented helmets.

Now if you're just out to enjoy a nice ride with your mates, or race mid pack local C grade, then perhaps it's no big deal - just ride what's comfy and you enjoy yourself. But if speed or saving energy is precious for your ride/race objective, then it makes complete sense to investigate sensible, legal, ethical means to improve your performance.


----------



## pulser955 (Apr 18, 2009)

Alex_Simmons/RST said:


> Can you explain how a less aerodynamic object like a helmet is no longer less aerodynamic in "dirty" air (as in riding in the draft of others)?
> 
> 
> When riding in the draft of others, you are not necessarily seeking to gain speed, but rather to reduce further the energy required to maintain your position. Saving energy is crucial in order to have more energy to use when it really matters, like the final sprint, or on a cumulative basis in a stage race.
> ...



Easy for 90% of the people riding bikes its useless. There are maybe 1% that get any advantage from aero helmets. Its like showing up at a cat5 race is a skinsuit. Its just not going to help you. I think lots of people lose total perspective with this stuff. All they can think about is its going to make them faster and there are vary few situations when it will. I would argue so few its better to spend your money on almost any thing else.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

pulser955 said:


> Easy for 90% of the people riding bikes its useless. There are maybe 1% that get any advantage from aero helmets. Its like showing up at a cat5 race is a skinsuit. Its just not going to help you. I think lots of people lose total perspective with this stuff. All they can think about is its going to make them faster and there are vary few situations when it will. I would argue so few its better to spend your money on almost any thing else.


You should have said that in the beginning.


----------



## pulser955 (Apr 18, 2009)

cxwrench said:


> You should have said that in the beginning.


See post 6.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

I can't believe I read most of this thread. Wow.


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

pulser955 said:


> Easy for 90% of the people riding bikes its useless. There are maybe 1% that get any advantage from aero helmets.


What is different about those 1% than the rest? Clearly the helmet, air, and physics are the same, so what is so special about that 1% that drag is reduced for them but not the rest (and once drag is reduced, the benefits follow naturally)?

Obviously, there is no special fairy dust just for that 1% and the advantage is there for everyone. Just as the Cat 5 rider in a skin suit will be faster for the same power or save power at the same speed just like his pro colleague.

There's plenty of data showing the benefits from these various pieces of equipment. Where's your data showing no change?


----------



## SauronHimself (Nov 21, 2012)

asgelle said:


> What is different about those 1% than the rest? Clearly the helmet, air, and physics are the same, so what is so special about that 1% that drag is reduced for them but not the rest (and once drag is reduced, the benefits follow naturally)?
> 
> Obviously, there is no special fairy dust just for that 1% and the advantage is there for everyone. Just as the Cat 5 rider in a skin suit will be faster for the same power or save power at the same speed just like his pro colleague.
> 
> There's plenty of data showing the benefits from these various pieces of equipment. Where's your data showing no change?


Yeah, the laws of physics don't change for the top 1% of riders, but it's a matter of benefit-to-investment ratios. The typical rider will not see benefits that justify what they paid. If we look at the actual physics of air resistance, the power needed to overcome drag follows a cubic curve. That kind of power output becomes much more apparent at 25+ mph than it does when you're averaging 15-20 mph.


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

SauronHimself said:


> Yeah, the laws of physics don't change for the top 1% of riders, but it's a matter of benefit-to-investment ratios.


That's a value judgement and is specific to every rider. There's no way to know in general how that works out. But there's a huge difference between the benefit is not worth the investment (which applies equally to things beyond equipment), and there not being a benefit.

And always remember while power goes as the cube of speed, time saved increases at decreasing speed (power saved is virtually constant). Thanks Alex.
Alex's Cycle Blog: Aero for slower riders


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

pulser955 said:


> Easy for 90% of the people riding bikes its useless. There are maybe 1% that get any advantage from aero helmets. Its like showing up at a cat5 race is a skinsuit. Its just not going to help you. I think lots of people lose total perspective with this stuff. All they can think about is its going to make them faster and there are vary few situations when it will. I would argue so few its better to spend your money on almost any thing else.


I will agree with you wholeheartedly about the "value" thing. Can't blame guys though, they, we, you and me, have bought into all the hyped products in cycling. It's what enthusiasts do man! Look at all the guys with their carbon Zipp on an LBS ride. For godsake if a pro from the 80s (nevermind those from the 60s and 70s) were riding a club ride today with his 80s steel bike with frame shifters, he might be wishing "man... i wish we were riding all these tricked out bikes back in the days..".

Having said this, I think the whole "aero" helmet thing is a bit of a joke. Guys in track cycling have been using "aero" helmets for a while now, eg. the Casco track helmet. Skatboarbers and bmx'ers have also been using aero helmets for a while now too. But suddenly Giro takes one of their skateboard helmet and fill in some holes, and roadies are debating physics and aerodynamics like they have Phd.

I'll bet if i just cover up the holes on my roadie helmet with black electrical tape, I'll be within 99% of the Giro Air aero specs, minus 99% of the dorky look. But in reality I'll probably just buy a $10 helmet cover and still get 80% of the benefit of the Giro,. and when it gets hot on a slow climb, I can just peel the cover off and enjoy massive ventilation. Giro Air is good if you're moving above 15 mph. Try climbing in one of them at 10 mph or lower, with 80F or higher, and you're cooked.


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

aclinjury said:


> ... and roadies are debating physics and aerodynamics like they have Phd.


You seem to forget, many do.



aclinjury said:


> I'll bet if i just cover up the holes on my roadie helmet with black electrical tape, I'll be within 99% of the Giro Air aero specs, minus 99% of the dorky look. But in reality I'll probably just buy a $10 helmet cover and still get 80% of the benefit of the Giro,. and when it gets hot on a slow climb, I can just peel the cover off and enjoy massive ventilation. Giro Air is good if you're moving above 15 mph. Try climbing in one of them at 10 mph or lower, with 80F or higher, and you're cooked.


Except you can't use tape or a cover in competition, and if you're not competing, ...


----------



## MR_GRUMPY (Aug 21, 2002)

Aero helmets are fine...

As long as you are

a) Doing an official sanctioned TT.

AND

b) You are getting close to breaking the hour in a 40K TT.

Aero helmets just look silly if

a) You are just out training

b) You are riding a "comfort bike" with aerobars.
.
.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

MR_GRUMPY said:


> Aero helmets are fine...
> 
> As long as you are
> 
> ...


I think you're somewhat confused as to the type of aero helmets being discussed here. No one is talking about TT helmets.


----------



## pulser955 (Apr 18, 2009)

asgelle said:


> What is different about those 1% than the rest? Clearly the helmet, air, and physics are the same, so what is so special about that 1% that drag is reduced for them but not the rest (and once drag is reduced, the benefits follow naturally)?
> 
> Obviously, there is no special fairy dust just for that 1% and the advantage is there for everyone. Just as the Cat 5 rider in a skin suit will be faster for the same power or save power at the same speed just like his pro colleague.
> 
> There's plenty of data showing the benefits from these various pieces of equipment. Where's your data showing no change?


The difference is that 1% will go fast enough for long enough to see any aero benefit from a stupid helmet. So unless you are a pro train a little harder and don't waste your money.


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

pulser955 said:


> The difference is that 1% will go fast enough for long enough to see any aero benefit from a stupid helmet.


Are you calling Alex a liar? He's shared plenty of data showing benefits and they've stood up. What've you got?


pulser955 said:


> So unless you are a pro train a little harder and don't waste your money.


You realize the same logic can be used to say "If you're not a pro, don't bother to train."


----------



## pulser955 (Apr 18, 2009)

asgelle said:


> Are you calling Alex a liar? He's shared plenty of data showing benefits and they've stood up. What've you got?
> 
> You realize the same logic can be used to say "If you're not a pro, don't bother to train."


What ever man if you think its going to make you faster buy one. I will just keep riding more miles.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

pulser955 said:


> The difference is that 1% will go fast enough for long enough to see any aero benefit from a stupid helmet. So unless you are a pro train a little harder and don't waste your money.


There is no magic speed that makes an aero advantage work. If it's more aerodynamic, it's more aerodynamic. At ANY speed. And you're definitely not the person to tell anyone what they should or shouldn't buy.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

pulser955 said:


> What ever man if you think its going to make you faster buy one. I will just keep riding more miles.












WHAT EVAR!


----------



## Floppybike (Jun 11, 2013)

KASK is cycling helmet used my Team SKY...what do you think about the shape?KASK Cycling Helmets | KASK Bike Helmets | Tour Cycling


----------



## mikerp (Jul 24, 2011)

I like them, the new Kask looks pretty cool as well.


----------



## mikerp (Jul 24, 2011)

pulser955 said:


> The difference is that 1% will go fast enough for long enough to see any aero benefit from a stupid helmet. So unless you are a pro train a little harder and don't waste your money.


Why are you worried about how other folks spend their money?


----------



## stevesbike (Jun 3, 2002)

first off, from a cost-benefit perspective, an aero helmet is probably the most cost effective piece of equipment you can buy in terms of watts/$. 20 watts @ 50 km/hr is more than the fastest wheel. 

Second off, can we just admit that 'can we admit x piece of equipment is stupid' threads are stupid. If you don't like it, don't buy it. Simple.


----------



## pulser955 (Apr 18, 2009)

mikerp said:


> Why are you worried about how other folks spend their money?


I'm really not. The whole point of this was to be a little tongue in cheek because I think specialized makes really ugly helmets. But every one freaks out when say expensive crap wont make you faster.


----------



## Ventruck (Mar 9, 2009)

pulser955 said:


> What ever man if you think its going to make you faster buy one. I will just keep riding more miles.


Tears

The helmets were made for elite professionals who could benefit from it from clear-cut scientific principle, and then mass produced to meet UCI standards as well as make money off the majority. But oh, many people are out of their minds thinking it'll help and are blindly throwing money at it. What is this new and unheard of practice? 

What next, they're gonna buy high end bikes? Are Ferrari and Porsche going to make track day oriented cars available to the public where they're probably not going to see an actual track? My word, 2013 is so different!


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

pulser955 said:


> But every one freaks out when say expensive crap wont make you faster.


Because you're entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

Floppybike said:


> KASK is cycling helmet used my Team SKY...what do you think about the shape?KASK Cycling Helmets | KASK Bike Helmets | Tour Cycling


Kask are nice in that they don't give a dorky look like the Giro Air.

Casco makes nice aero helmets. I really dig the rear air diffuser. That's Formula1 technology right there!!
SPEEDtime

Compared to Kask and Casco, the Giro Air is crude (aka, skateboard helment with holes plugged up). I mean aero helmets are nothing new. But what is new is that Giro is able to take a skateboard helmet and make roadies take notice about aero. I wonder if the track guys are laughing a bit about this whole "aero road" helmets thing, thing that they've been using for a while now on the track. It's like skin suit. Guys are starting to use skin suit on the road now too, look like a mermaid or a ballerina. That's where I put my foot down! But hey, it's "aero", cheat the wind, good stuff for a local LBS ride, lol.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

So who doesn't ride a bike with modern gearing systems? Or is that only for the pros?

Seriously, people present a false dichotomy here. Buying a nice bit of kit doesn't preclude one from also training harder.

It's just a matter of priorities. If you just need to protect your head and are not overly concerned with performance oriented outcomes, then it matters little what kit you wear. 

But if you do care about performance, and are looking for ways to improve, then you consider the options. The question then become, which options are of higher priority given the individual's constraints (time, money, ability, rest of life factors etc).

Only two* ways to go faster:
i. increase power output
ii reduce resistance forces

And then layer on that ways to improve race craft.

So one can then sort out which improvements require:
more time (e.g. training, learning skills, gaining experience), 
more money (e.g. aerodynamic wheels, clothing options), and 
a combination of both (e.g. testing of position, or some quality coaching).

There is nothing to say a rider couldn't or shouldn't look to do any or all of those things in concert, if what they seek is an improvement in performance. People are making value judgements based on their own perception of what's important and are presenting such things as mutually exclusive alternatives when they may well be complementary.

Rather, assess what's important to an individual and what resources (time, money etc), they have to play with, then you assess how those resources can best be utilised.

I agree that the priority ranking of various improvement options for a newbie Cat 5 will be different to the ranking for a Cat 1 looking to get a pro contract. I don't think anyone is suggesting otherwise. But if you are going to make a sound judgement call on what's important, at least do so on the basis of evidence, not myth.



* in timed solo events there is a third way - optimal pacing


----------



## SauronHimself (Nov 21, 2012)

I actually like the look of the S-Works Evade. I tend to like the look of those oddball helmets. Hence why I own a Catlike Whisper Plus.


----------



## Maximus_XXIV (Nov 10, 2008)

I really like the Kask helmet. I will pick up one of those before I buy a $2000 wheelset or $3000 aero frame. This is the cheapest speed evar!!!

By the by, yall should be riding Kmart bikes because only 1% of riders will benefit from anything better. Love the RBR!!!


----------



## bvber (Apr 23, 2011)

aclinjury said:


> Casco makes nice aero helmets. I really dig the rear air diffuser. That's Formula1 technology right there!!
> SPEEDtime


I see some consistency in German design. :yesnod:

View attachment 283280


View attachment 283279


----------



## deviousalex (Aug 18, 2010)

pulser955 said:


> Its like showing up at a cat5 race is a skinsuit. Its just not going to help you.


First race I ever did (as a Cat 5) was 25.3 mph with 1,000 ft of climbing in 35 minutes. I do think a skinsuit probably would have helped


----------



## mikerp (Jul 24, 2011)

pulser955 said:


> I'm really not. The whole point of this was to be a little tongue in cheek because I think specialized makes really ugly helmets. But every one freaks out when say expensive crap wont make you faster.


Looks are subjective, subjective preferences are not even worth discussing.
I personally like all the new aero helmets be it the Air Attack, Evade, and Infinity.
Spotted: Specialized Evade aero road helmet
Spotted: Kask?s new road helmet with adjustable vents


----------



## velodog (Sep 26, 2007)

The thing that bothers me about the Casco and the Giro Air Attack is the eye shield. We're wearing a helmet 1st for protection in the event of a crash, yet these helmets have an eye shield with a raw edge right in the cyclists face.

Even if the shield is easily removed that edge is right there in said cyclists face and eyes moving in who knows what direction in the event of a crash. 

It's like helmet safety has become secondary to aero benefits.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

forge55b said:


> aerodynamics of head = bad
> 
> aerodynamics of head with aero helmet = not as bad


Thus, all the cool and successful pros are riding decapitated this season.


----------



## nOOky (Mar 20, 2009)

Pretty sure unless it's being used for a time trial or solo breakaway an aero helmet is fairly useless. Any advantage you gain over your daily 40 mile ride is wiped away when you sit up to stretch your back or take a swig of your water bottle. I really doubt average speeds will be increasing by 2 mph across the board, but this is RBR I suppose it can happen to some members who've bought the helmet


----------



## Marc (Jan 23, 2005)

nOOky said:


> Pretty sure unless it's being used for a time trial or solo breakaway an aero helmet is fairly useless. Any advantage you gain over your daily 40 mile ride is wiped away when you sit up to stretch your back or take a swig of your water bottle. I really doubt average speeds will be increasing by 2 mph across the board, but this is RBR I suppose it can happen to some members who've bought the helmet


If it wasn't so pricey I've thought of getting an Air Attack...simply because it cools quite well, and you don't need a doo-rag underneath the lid to prevent Darth-Maul sun burn.


----------



## Oxtox (Aug 16, 2006)

Catlike has the market cornered with regards to ugly helmet design. 

but, the Spec Evade and Prevail are definitely contenders in the aesthetically unpleasing category.


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

nOOky said:


> Pretty sure unless it's being used for a time trial or solo breakaway an aero helmet is fairly useless. Any advantage you gain over your daily 40 mile ride is wiped away when you sit up to stretch your back or take a swig of your water bottle.


This logic doesn't make any sense. If drag is reduced, it's reduced alone, in the pack, or while drinking. So while drag might increase when sitting up compared to being in a better position, the aero helmet will still make that drag lower than it would have been with a standard one.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

nOOky said:


> Pretty sure unless it's being used for a time trial or solo breakaway an aero helmet is fairly useless. Any advantage you gain over your daily 40 mile ride is wiped away when you sit up to stretch your back or take a swig of your water bottle. I really doubt average speeds will be increasing by 2 mph across the board, but this is RBR I suppose it can happen to some members who've bought the helmet


You don't understand what's going on w/ aerodynamics. If there is an advantage, there is an advantage all the time. It's dependent on many variables, but it's always there. If you drink or stretch w/ an aero helmet on your head you'll probably do the same thing w/ a regular helmet. 
I'll never understand why people make comments like yours. Aerodynamics work 100% of the time, doesn't matter whether you're solo, at the front, in the middle, or at the back. I would never claim a 2mph average speed gain, at any speed, much less "across the board"...that's just stupid. I also don't think anyone is claiming that you'll be riding away from your competition because you're wearing an ugly helmet. But if you can use a slightly smaller amount of power during a ride, that's power you can use to go slightly faster, or have a little more left in the tank at the end for the finish.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

German engineering indeed! See that's the difference between real German engineering, versus Giro highschool project enginnering from 1990.

man those rear spoilers will surely break up the air vortex behind the neck, thus giving the wearer a 5 mph advantage in a 2000W sprint*

(* = compared to a person wearing a normal helmet putting out 1200W)

But the real benefit is the Casco ditch the "bucket lid" look:cryin:



bvber said:


> I see some consistency in German design. :yesnod:
> 
> View attachment 283285


----------



## jspharmd (May 24, 2006)

Alex_Simmons/RST said:


> Can you explain how a less aerodynamic object like a helmet is no longer less aerodynamic in "dirty" air (as in riding in the draft of others)?
> 
> 
> When riding in the draft of others, you are not necessarily seeking to gain speed, but rather to reduce further the energy required to maintain your position. Saving energy is crucial in order to have more energy to use when it really matters, like the final sprint, or on a cumulative basis in a stage race.
> ...


I don't have a dog in this fight, but I am curious about wind tunnel testing. 

When you test the helmets, do you only test them straight on? 

Do you change the position of the rider so that you can see how the helmet performs in a crosswind too? 

Do you position obstacles around the rider to see how turbulent flow affects the performance of a helmet? 

Do you test in the tunnel with the rider out of the saddle sprinting? 

I'm truly curious about this and my career training did not include a great deal of physics. My questions are purely based on curiosity.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

As I was reading this thread, I just noticed the Giro Air Attack ad to the right side of this webpage. Apparently, Giro marketing seems to be in tuned to the fact that folks are comparing this helment to a skateboard, and they're running ad to counter such image:idea:



> View attachment 283287


----------



## jspharmd (May 24, 2006)

Marc said:


> If it wasn't so pricey I've thought of getting an Air Attack...simply because it cools quite well, and you don't need a doo-rag underneath the lid to prevent Darth-Maul sun burn.


Sunscreen works for this...


----------



## Marc (Jan 23, 2005)

jspharmd said:


> Sunscreen works for this...


Because sunscreen when applied to the face/head never drips down into your eyes resulting in stinging eyes for the rest of your ride.


----------



## SauronHimself (Nov 21, 2012)

aclinjury said:


> As I was reading this thread, I just noticed the Giro Air Attack ad to the right side of this webpage. Apparently, Giro marketing seems to be in tuned to the fact that folks are comparing this helment to a skateboard, and they're running ad to counter such image:idea:


I hope that dude doesn't break a spoke on those Easton wheels. :cornut:


----------



## nOOky (Mar 20, 2009)

Whoooosh...





cxwrench said:


> You don't understand what's going on w/ aerodynamics. If there is an advantage, there is an advantage all the time. It's dependent on many variables, but it's always there. If you drink or stretch w/ an aero helmet on your head you'll probably do the same thing w/ a regular helmet.
> I'll never understand why people make comments like yours. Aerodynamics work 100% of the time, doesn't matter whether you're solo, at the front, in the middle, or at the back. I would never claim a 2mph average speed gain, at any speed, much less "across the board"...that's just stupid. I also don't think anyone is claiming that you'll be riding away from your competition because you're wearing an ugly helmet. But if you can use a slightly smaller amount of power during a ride, that's power you can use to go slightly faster, or have a little more left in the tank at the end for the finish.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

Alex,
what you said is all true. I don't think anyone is really denying that there is no real aero advantage... although this is the internet and people will exerggerate their position by saying phrase such as "it's utterly useless!",, blah blah.. so when one goes critiquing the internet, one must keep perspectives in mind as the internet is not academia.

However, I want to raise a few points that a whole lots of folks miss when they think they need to go "aero". First of all, a lot of folks who suddenly jump on the "aero" bandwagon (be it a frame, or a helmet) are doing it based on the hype they see. Aero helmets have been around for a while now, track guys have been using them a while now,.. but don't you find it comical it's only now that "serious" roadies are beginning to jump on the bandwagon? and jump on it based on the Air Attack (of all things ugly!)? If these folks are really serious about aero, they would look into track helmets years ago. That's what I find comical about it. I will not say that "aero helmets are stupid".. but I will say that the way folks are suddenly discovering "aero helmets" based on the ugly Air Attack... is a little comical at least.

The other factor is that I'm almost certain that 100% of the folks in here are not pros, certainly not paid pros. "Competitively cycling" for them is trying to beat the next bloke who is also a daily grinder at the office. It's my opinion that "competive cycling" in this case should be 1) for fun, 2) fitness, 3) winning. But the way these discussions sound like it's all about winning. You will probably agree with me that for most folks in here, fitness is a greater challenge to them then aerodynamics. Aerodynamics is like bolt on toys, if you can get it, so can the next guy! So by that reasoning, where is the real advantage now? The real advantage, the thing that enables one to trump the field, still relies on your fitness. And I feel that guys are getting too all caught up in aero improvement thing.

But ok, guys will say.."but this is what makes ME feel good, this is how I FEEL is good value TO ME! Who are you to pass your values on to me".

Fair enough. Then I ask. Would this also be the same guys who would make fun of a fat dude in a skinsuit and aero bars riding at 15 mph on the river trail? Would this also be the same folks who would post the fat's picture up here so everyone can make funny comments on? In fact, forget about the fat guy analogy. I will bet these folks will make fun of his fellow man if such man is wearing a skinsuit and full conical aero helmet on a Sunday LBS ride.

To me, it's not so much an argument against the science of aerodynamics, but more so about how suddenly we need to want every aero advantage possible based on a bandwagon movement sort of, and based on the Air Attack, of all things ugly... And we want it to a point that we're not seeing the satire of it all, and we're bring physics into the discussion. Seriously, physics? But at the end of the day, if you ain't getting paid for what you're doing, then you're just doing it for fun.

Now if we are talking about those Kask or Casco, then ok... that's a different story! Those helmets are sexy, especially those Casco!




Alex_Simmons/RST said:


> So who doesn't ride a bike with modern gearing systems? Or is that only for the pros?
> 
> Seriously, people present a false dichotomy here. Buying a nice bit of kit doesn't preclude one from also training harder.
> 
> ...


----------



## jspharmd (May 24, 2006)

Marc said:


> Because sunscreen when applied to the face/head never drips down into your eyes resulting in stinging eyes for the rest of your ride.


I sweat a good deal, and live in the hot and humid south. I use the sport, spray-on sunscreen with no problems. Try it.


----------



## den bakker (Nov 13, 2004)

aclinjury said:


> Alex,
> what you said is all true. I don't think anyone is really denying that there is no real aero advantage... although this is the internet and people will exerggerate their position by saying phrase such as "it's utterly useless!",, blah blah.. so when one goes critiquing the internet, one must keep perspectives in mind as the internet is not academia.
> 
> However, I want to raise a few points that a whole lots of folks miss when they think they need to go "aero". First of all, a lot of folks who suddenly jump on the "aero" bandwagon (be it a frame, or a helmet) are doing it based on the hype they see. Aero helmets have been around for a while now, track guys have been using them a while now,.. but don't you find it comical it's only now that "serious" roadies are beginning to jump on the bandwagon? and jump on it based on the Air Attack (of all things ugly!)? If these folks are really serious about aero, they would look into track helmets years ago. That's what I find comical about it. I will not say that "aero helmets are stupid".. but I will say that the way folks are suddenly discovering "aero helmets" based on the ugly Air Attack... is a little comical at least.
> ...


could you please lay out how you define words and what your feelings are in general so we can skip all this another time? 
thanks in advance.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

den bakker said:


> could you please lay out how you define words and what your feelings are in general so we can skip all this another time?
> thanks in advance.


and I'm replying to your post to post pad!


----------



## den bakker (Nov 13, 2004)

aclinjury said:


> and I'm replying to your post to post pad!


at least you kept the post shorter than normal. same amount of information though. thanks again.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

den bakker said:


> at least you kept the post shorter than normal. same amount of information though. thanks again.


need to keep it under 5 sec for you. welcome.


----------



## stevesbike (Jun 3, 2002)

It's pretty simple actually. The Giro Air Attack is readily available in the US market and it's CPSC certified. Until recently, many of the Casco and Kask helmets you mentioned were mainly available in European certifications and so weren't legal for events in the US. Some had both European and CPSC versions, but they were hard to track down the CPSC models and were not available from US vendors. Even now, it's hard to locate many of these. Besides, the track helmets you mention were optimized for sprint events. 



aclinjury said:


> Alex,
> what you said is all true. I don't think anyone is really denying that there is no real aero advantage... although this is the internet and people will exerggerate their position by saying phrase such as "it's utterly useless!",, blah blah.. so when one goes critiquing the internet, one must keep perspectives in mind as the internet is not academia.
> 
> However, I want to raise a few points that a whole lots of folks miss when they think they need to go "aero". First of all, a lot of folks who suddenly jump on the "aero" bandwagon (be it a frame, or a helmet) are doing it based on the hype they see. Aero helmets have been around for a while now, track guys have been using them a while now,.. but don't you find it comical it's only now that "serious" roadies are beginning to jump on the bandwagon? and jump on it based on the Air Attack (of all things ugly!)? If these folks are really serious about aero, they would look into track helmets years ago. That's what I find comical about it. I will not say that "aero helmets are stupid".. but I will say that the way folks are suddenly discovering "aero helmets" based on the ugly Air Attack... is a little comical at least.
> ...


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

thank you for clarification about the rules in the US.

Now when you go to a typical race, I'm talking about grass root level sort of race, not US national, do they check to see if your helmet meets the CPSC standard?

And here I also find it a little amusing that Olympic athletes are using Kask and Casco while US amateurs cannot because they don't meet a certain US based standard. But it is what it is with the rules eh. This is when competition in standards (and loyalty fees) can shut out certain markets from acquiring an awesome helmet.



stevesbike said:


> It's pretty simple actually. The Giro Air Attack is readily available in the US market and it's CPSC certified. Until recently, many of the Casco and Kask helmets you mentioned were mainly available in European certifications and so weren't legal for events in the US. Some had both European and CPSC versions, but they were hard to track down the CPSC models and were not available from US vendors. Even now, it's hard to locate many of these. Besides, the track helmets you mention were optimized for sprint events.


----------



## stevesbike (Jun 3, 2002)

I've seen race officials ask to look at a rider's helmet at local races. They can ask at their discretion, so who wants to spend $400 on a helmet and be disqualified? Also, if you were injured and an insurance company found you were wearing a helmet that did not meet the US certification, who knows what sort of issues that would present (CPSC is more stringent that EU standards). 

You seem to find a lot of things amusing. UCI events have different rules than USA cycling events. Not sure what's so funny about that. Helmets sold in the US have to be CPSC certified. Makes it pretty easy to just buy something available locally, which is why you see more Giro helmets in the US. 



aclinjury said:


> thank you for clarification about the rules in the US.
> 
> Now when you go to a typical race, I'm talking about grass root level sort of race, not US national, do they check to see if your helmet meets the CPSC standard?
> 
> And here I also find it a little amusing that Olympic athletes are using Kask and Casco while US amateurs cannot because they don't meet a certain US based standard. But it is what it is with the rules eh. This is when competition in standards (and loyalty fees) can shut out certain markets from acquiring an awesome helmet.


----------



## nhluhr (Sep 9, 2010)

pulser955 said:


> Actually yes I do I race. And unless you are in clean air I can't see how it will do any good. With all the turbulent air coming off every thing around you and the wind that can be from any direction its useless.


Packfodder spend all their time in dirty air. Winners have to be in clean air sometimes.


pulser955 said:


> The difference is that 1% will go fast enough for long enough to see any aero benefit from a stupid helmet. So unless you are a pro train a little harder and don't waste your money.


You failed calculus in high school didn't you?

FACT: Slower riders gain more of a time benefit from aero tweaks than faster riders.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

nhluhr said:


> Packfodder spend all their time in dirty air. Winners have to be in clean air sometimes.You failed calculus in high school didn't you?
> 
> *FACT: Slower riders gain more of a time benefit from aero tweaks than faster riders.*


^ This is the truth ^

I suck at math and still know this is true...


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

I think ppl need to stop crapping all over the dreams of the weekend warriors cycling at 17.1mph instead of their normal 17.0mph. :smilewinkgrin:


----------



## deviousalex (Aug 18, 2010)

SystemShock said:


> I think ppl need to stop crapping all over the dreams of the weekend warriors cycling at 17.1mph instead of their normal 17.0mph. :smilewinkgrin:


Over a 500 mile ride that's time for 1 extra espresso!


----------



## skitorski (Dec 4, 2012)

The fellah in the link pic would do more aero, if he shaved and had less Hairo.

It's brutal being an icon and standing up to the scrutiny and hate of the maddening mob.


----------



## nOOky (Mar 20, 2009)

SystemShock said:


> I think ppl need to stop crapping all over the dreams of the weekend warriors cycling at 17.1mph instead of their normal 17.0mph. :smilewinkgrin:


I did some quick math. Over the past 10 years frames themselves have gotten 310% stiffer, 120% lighter, and 182.375% more aero. Given that alone without aero helmets and wider wheels and tires weekend warriors should be managing at least 17.325 mph and not 17.1 mph. I don't think the weekend warriors are taking advantage of all those extra milliseconds per mile they should be gaining. I bet the eyeglass or helmet mirrors are partially to blame, as well as unzipping of the jerseys on hot days.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

nOOky said:


> I did some quick math. Over the past 10 years frames themselves have gotten 310% stiffer, 120% lighter, and 182.375% more aero. Given that alone without aero helmets and wider wheels and tires weekend warriors should be managing at least 17.325 mph and not 17.1 mph. I don't think the weekend warriors are taking advantage of all those extra milliseconds per mile they should be gaining. I bet the eyeglass or helmet mirrors are partially to blame, as well as unzipping of the jerseys on hot days.


Don't forget saddle bags that can double as weekenders, fanny packs, windjackets tied around waists, and shorts 2 sizes too big.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

nOOky said:


> I did some quick math. Over the past 10 years frames themselves have gotten 310% stiffer, 120% lighter, and 182.375% more aero. Given that alone without aero helmets and wider wheels and tires weekend warriors should be managing at least 17.325 mph and not 17.1 mph. I don't think the weekend warriors are taking advantage of all those extra milliseconds per mile they should be gaining. I bet the eyeglass or helmet mirrors are partially to blame, as well as unzipping of the jerseys on hot days.


The funny thing is that the ONE piece of equipment that would actually make a very significant difference in road-riding speeds — something like a handlebar-mounted motorcycle-type fairing — is considered too uncool to even be viable.

To a lesser extent tri-bars too, but those tend to be dangerous/tricky in pack riding, and not everyone wants to have that tri/TT position for everyday riding, either.


----------



## bvber (Apr 23, 2011)

SystemShock said:


> The funny thing is that the ONE piece of equipment that would actually make a very significant difference in road-riding speeds — something like a handlebar-mounted motorcycle-type fairing — is considered too uncool to even be viable.
> 
> To a lesser extent tri-bars too, but those tend to be dangerous/tricky in pack riding, and not everyone wants to have that tri/TT position for everyday riding, either.


This guy has it right.

View attachment 283352


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

bvber said:


> This guy has it right.
> 
> View attachment 283352




Stuff like that doesn't HAVE to look uncool, y'know:


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

SystemShock said:


> The funny thing is that the ONE piece of equipment that would actually make a very significant difference in road-riding speeds — something like a handlebar-mounted motorcycle-type fairing — is considered too uncool to even be viable


People need to use equipment that is within the rules of the sport. What you describe is not permitted in cycle races, including time trials and triathlon.

If you are not competing, well you can do what you like provided it's with the laws of your jurisdiction.




SystemShock said:


> To a lesser extent tri-bars too, but those tend to be dangerous/tricky in pack riding, and not everyone wants to have that tri/TT position for everyday riding, either.


Not permitted in mass start cycle races.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

aclinjury said:


> thank you for clarification about the rules in the US.
> 
> Now when you go to a typical race, I'm talking about grass root level sort of race, not US national, do they check to see if your helmet meets the CPSC standard?
> 
> And here I also find it a little amusing that Olympic athletes are using Kask and Casco while US amateurs cannot because they don't meet a certain US based standard. But it is what it is with the rules eh. This is when competition in standards (and loyalty fees) can shut out certain markets from acquiring an awesome helmet.


Cycling helmet laws vary around the world. In Australia we not only have mandatory helmet laws for all cyclists, but the helmets must also meet ASA standards (and that is a specific and separate test to US and European standards). It may not seem to make sense, but then helmets are hardly the first thing on the planet to have different standards in different countries.

As for helmet checking, they certainly do check helmets here in Australia on a regular basis, and I have seen helmet check performed in the USA. It doesn't happen all the time of course, usually these sorts of things are based on how many officials are available to assist the running of a race.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

Alex_Simmons/RST said:


> People need to use equipment that is within the rules of the sport. What you describe is not permitted in cycle races, including time trials and triathlon.
> 
> If you are not competing, well you can do what you like provided it's with the laws of your jurisdiction.
> 
> Not permitted in mass start cycle races.


I think most recreational and even many club riders don't really care if their equipment is illegal for racing purposes. Most of 'em don't race.

Where it interferes is in the marketing... for some ppl, if they can't see some cool pros using it in competition, then they don't want it. But that's far from being everyone.

Don't misconstrue my observations on fairings being a call to them, though... like most other ppl, I wouldn't buy one unless it was cool-looking, didn't get in the way, and was very lightweight. But I'm not aware of anything like that on the market right now... perhaps someone reading the thread is.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

jspharmd said:


> When you test the helmets, do you only test them straight on?
> Do you change the position of the rider so that you can see how the helmet performs in a crosswind too?


When I test helmets, it's on the rider while riding their bike, using power data analysis techniques. Depending on the application, I might do that at an outdoor or an indoor track.

But I also have several clients (maybe 6 or 8) who have tested their helmets in wind tunnels. Depending on the tunnel, testing can be performed at a variety of yaw angles.



jspharmd said:


> Do you position obstacles around the rider to see how turbulent flow affects the performance of a helmet?


No, but then I don't consider that necessary. Most aero helmet testing is for solo events like ITT and pursuits, or team events like team pursuit and TTT. I'm yet to see a better helmet for a solo rider perform worse in a team scenario, but that level of testing is pretty rare.



jspharmd said:


> Do you test in the tunnel with the rider out of the saddle sprinting?


Not in the tunnel but I have tested this with riders at the track.

Jim Martin et al has also reported on the aerodynamics of sprinting, and many would be surprised to learn what's the fastest technique. Let me just say that getting out of the saddle may not always be fastest means to accelerate.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

aclinjury said:


> Alex,
> what you said is all true. I don't think anyone is really denying that there is no real aero advantage... although this is the internet and people will exerggerate their position by saying phrase such as "it's utterly useless!",, blah blah.. so when one goes critiquing the internet, one must keep perspectives in mind as the internet is not academia.
> 
> However, I want to raise a few points that a whole lots of folks miss when they think they need to go "aero". First of all, *a lot of folks who suddenly jump on the "aero" bandwagon* (be it a frame, or a helmet) are doing it based on the hype they see.


Is it really a lot, or just another internet exaggeration as you say?



aclinjury said:


> Aero helmets have been around for a while now, track guys have been using them a while now,.. but don't you find it comical it's only now that "serious" roadies are beginning to jump on the bandwagon? and jump on it based on the Air Attack (of all things ugly!)? If these folks are really serious about aero, they would look into track helmets years ago. That's what I find comical about it.


Couple of comments:

1. At pro level, riders ride what the sponsors require them to ride. That often means they are using less than optimal equipment, and this is particularly so for things like helmets, tyres, wheels and clothing. I would never base my choice of equipment just because a "favourite pro" uses it.

2. Road race cyclists have often been late to the part with certain innovations, nothing new in that. Traditions and a strong tendency to be influenced by what pro are using, hence ref point #1. I don't disagree that it's a little comical.



aclinjury said:


> The other factor is that I'm almost certain that 100% of the folks in here are not pros, certainly not paid pros. "Competitively cycling" for them is trying to beat the next bloke who is also a daily grinder at the office. It's my opinion that "competive cycling" in this case should be 1) for fun, 2) fitness, 3) winning. But the way these discussions sound like it's all about winning.


And hence why I make the distinction between those that are truly seeking a competitive advantage (no matter their level) and those that are not. 

Riding at all levels should be enjoyable. If it's not, you really won't do it for long (even as a pro that's true).



aclinjury said:


> You will probably agree with me that for most folks in here, fitness is a greater challenge to them then aerodynamics. Aerodynamics is like bolt on toys, if you can get it, so can the next guy! So by that reasoning, where is the real advantage now? The real advantage, the thing that enables one to trump the field, still relies on your fitness. And I feel that guys are getting too all caught up in aero improvement thing.


I actually don't know what most folks in here do riding/racing wise, so I don't like to assume what their needs are, hence instead I like to point out the realities with valid and factual data and information, and allow people to then apply their own judgement.

If someone asks me specifically for advice, then I'd ask them for information relevant to their circumstances before making suggestions.

The real advantage in aerodynamics is making wise choices based on actual data. The same helmet may not be the best aerodynamic choice for two different riders. I have examples of helmets that work really well for one rider and not so well on another.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

SystemShock said:


> I think most recreational and even many club riders don't really care if their equipment is illegal for racing purposes. Most of 'em don't race.
> 
> Where it interferes is in the marketing... for some ppl, if they can't see some cool pros using it in competition, then they don't want it. But that's far from being everyone.


That applies to just about everything you can buy, not specifically cycling helmets.

Why do you think celebrity endorsement is one of the biggest forms of advertising/marketing? It influences people despite the reality or not of the purported benefits.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

Alex_Simmons/RST said:


> That applies to just about everything you can buy, not specifically cycling helmets.
> 
> Why do you think celebrity endorsement is one of the biggest forms of advertising/marketing? It influences people despite the reality or not of the purported benefits.



You're sure preaching hard to the converted, Alex. No one stated that marketing only applied to cycling equipment.

I think most ppl are already aware that the reach of marketing goes well beyond that.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

Out of curiosity, anyone using aero road helmets in very windy areas? Occasionally, I think about using one when I'm fighting against a steady 15mph headwind with 30mph gusts.


----------



## masont (Feb 6, 2010)

cxwrench said:


> I think you're somewhat confused as to the type of aero helmets being discussed here. No one is talking about TT helmets.


I think most of the fine people involved in this discussion are massively confused


----------



## djg21 (Oct 25, 2003)

Do a google search. There are plenty of studies confirming that aero helmets can make as much of a difference as aero wheels while TTing, and can be more cost effective.

for instance: Buying Speed; Aero Helmet vs. Aero Wheels


----------



## bwbishop (Sep 17, 2011)

Not to be a nit-picking engineer, but there was no math, no tests, and no proof in that article. All he said was that the body represents 70% of drag and the bike 30%. 

So clearly a helmet is better?


----------



## djg21 (Oct 25, 2003)

bwbishop said:


> Not to be a nit-picking engineer, but there was no math, no tests, and no proof in that article. All he said was that the body represents 70% of drag and the bike 30%.
> 
> So clearly a helmet is better?


do the Google search. There are studies available if you have time to find them. I just picked the first cogent article I found. 

In fact, this has been gospel for some time. You can buy an aero helmet for well under $200 (I bought my specialized new on eBay for under $100). A disk and aero wheel, not so much. Bang for the buck is in the helmet. There really isn't a dispute. If you are regularly TTing,have a dedicated bike, and have spent time on your position, the helmet is a no-brainer.

That being said, my aero helmet comes out of the closet maybe 6-10 times each season for time trials. Even on my TT bike, I prefer to train in my everyday Giro (and with 32 spoke wheels).


----------



## bayAreaDude (Apr 13, 2012)

I like how they look. They remind me of helmets worn in every other context except cycling. Back to reasonable.


----------



## bayAreaDude (Apr 13, 2012)

aclinjury said:


> I will agree with you wholeheartedly about the "value" thing. Can't blame guys though, they, we, you and me, have bought into all the hyped products in cycling. It's what enthusiasts do man! Look at all the guys with their carbon Zipp on an LBS ride. For godsake if a pro from the 80s (nevermind those from the 60s and 70s) were riding a club ride today with his 80s steel bike with frame shifters, he might be wishing "man... i wish we were riding all these tricked out bikes back in the days..".
> 
> Having said this, I think the whole "aero" helmet thing is a bit of a joke. Guys in track cycling have been using "aero" helmets for a while now, eg. the Casco track helmet. Skatboarbers and bmx'ers have also been using aero helmets for a while now too. But suddenly Giro takes one of their skateboard helmet and fill in some holes, and roadies are debating physics and aerodynamics like they have Phd.
> 
> I'll bet if i just cover up the holes on my roadie helmet with black electrical tape, I'll be within 99% of the Giro Air aero specs, minus 99% of the dorky look. But in reality I'll probably just buy a $10 helmet cover and still get 80% of the benefit of the Giro,. and when it gets hot on a slow climb, I can just peel the cover off and enjoy massive ventilation. Giro Air is good if you're moving above 15 mph. Try climbing in one of them at 10 mph or lower, with 80F or higher, and you're cooked.


Have you climbed with that helmet on in those condition or is this just a guess with a bias?


----------



## Burnette (Mar 25, 2013)

*It's Just A Helmet And You're Not Sexy*

First, nOOky, loved your post, you are hilarious! With all the break throughs and improvements, we shouldn't even have to pedal!
So true that manufacturers throw out crazy percentages and
downplay products they made last year so you will buy they 15%
better one they have now.
Second, for those who say the Air Attack is dorky, well, sorry to tell you, but you and your whole get up is stupid looking and truly dorky to 99.9% (see, we can use percentages too!) of the world. That duck tail space ship on your head ain't gettin you laid no time soon. If you were going for sharp looks, you shouldn't have chose cycling as your palette.
To the masses, you are a doofus who dresses funny to go ride a bicycle. You are a person with a worse fashion
sense than a wanna be pro golfer. So there, you are spitting on your
socially unaware brother.
Yes, Giro is throwing out "advantage" with said percentages and they should be called on it. But the draw of the Air Attack for me is the shield, I would like to be able to were Rx glasses under a tinted shield.
The future is such a helmet/shield with a heads up display.
Here is an expensive early adopter of what I mean:
http://jet.reconinstruments.com/
This unit is a miss for me, but maybe Giro can partner with Garmin and have a much better display on the Air Attack. Or even mate the shield/HUD to the space ship duck tail helmets even, I like those too.
Just give me something with the shield.


----------



## Dunbar (Aug 8, 2010)

Burnette said:


> To the masses, you are a doofus who dresses funny to go ride a bicycle.


True but roadie fashion rules have always been about looking cool to other roadies. They're the only ones who can appreciate you $300 leotard...I mean kit.

I love how everyone brings up racing to justify these aerodynamic parts. But you see no correlation between aero equipment and success in professional bike racing. And at some point, when a majority of the field is all using the latest aero equipment, there's no advantage to be had (you're just keeping up with the rat race.) A good example of this phenomenon is carbon fiber wheels which are now ubiquitous in the pro peloton.


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

Dunbar said:


> But you see no correlation between aero equipment and success in professional bike racing.


Has any one published a statistical analysis? Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

Dunbar said:


> True but roadie fashion rules have always been about looking cool to other roadies. They're the only ones who can appreciate you $300 leotard...I mean kit.
> 
> I love how everyone brings up racing to justify these aerodynamic parts. *But you see no correlation between aero equipment and success in professional bike racing.* And at some point, when a majority of the field is all using the latest aero equipment, there's no advantage to be had (you're just keeping up with the rat race.) A good example of this phenomenon is carbon fiber wheels which are now ubiquitous in the pro peloton.


Really? If that's the case try to convince a pro to ride a steel frame w/ box section alloy rims. Good luck w/ that.


----------



## velodog (Sep 26, 2007)

They're freakin' helmets!

If you race buy all the performance, real or perceived that you can afford. And if you don't race buy what you like.

Don't worry about the other guy, some will agree and some won't, life's funny like that.

It seems to me that it's as simple as that


----------



## Dunbar (Aug 8, 2010)

cxwrench said:


> Really? If that's the case try to convince a pro to ride a steel frame w/ box section alloy rims. Good luck w/ that.


Nice non-sequitir. You want me to convince pros to ride a bike many of their sponsors don't even sell? I believe I have seen some pros riding alloy front wheels in the hilly stages of the pro tour. I see lots of pros wearing non-aero helmets and riding non-aero frames. If it made the difference between winning and losing they'd all be using them.


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

Dunbar said:


> If it made the difference between winning and losing they'd all be using them.


That presupposes all riders are there trying to win, which is clearly not the case. So this argument fails as well.


----------



## Dunbar (Aug 8, 2010)

asgelle said:


> That presupposes all riders are there trying to win, which is clearly not the case. So this argument fails as well.


The idea that so many pro riders select (non-aero) equipment before a race stage starts because they aren't interested in winning is hilarious.


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

Dunbar said:


> The idea that so many pro riders select (non-aero) equipment before a race stage starts because they aren't interested in winning is hilarious.


Whether that's true or not*, since no one posited this line of thinking, it's just another dodge.

But it is demonstrably true. Cavendish wore a skinsuit on stage one while the rest of the team did not. It's easy to see that since no one else was likely to be racing for the win, they chose the greater functionality of jerseys over the increased speed of a skinsuit.


----------



## bwbishop (Sep 17, 2011)

djg21 said:


> do the Google search. There are studies available if you have time to find them. I just picked the first cogent article I found.
> 
> In fact, this has been gospel for some time. You can buy an aero helmet for well under $200 (I bought my specialized new on eBay for under $100). A disk and aero wheel, not so much. Bang for the buck is in the helmet. There really isn't a dispute. If you are regularly TTing,have a dedicated bike, and have spent time on your position, the helmet is a no-brainer.
> 
> That being said, my aero helmet comes out of the closet maybe 6-10 times each season for time trials. Even on my TT bike, I prefer to train in my everyday Giro (and with 32 spoke wheels).


I don't actually care enough to do my own search, I just clicked on the evidence provided and found absolutely zero evidence provided.

Like I said, just a nit picking engineer, carry on...


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

Dunbar said:


> The idea that so many pro riders select (non-aero) equipment before a race stage starts because they aren't interested in winning is hilarious.


In reality, it's true. Using Cav as an example, on the days he knows have a high probability of ending in sprint he will wear a skin suit and aero helmet. On the days w/ enough climbing that he knows he won't be in the lead group at the end, he wears bibs/jersey and a normal helmet. 
Domestiques that aren't involved in lead-out situations will do the same. It's more important that they can pack 8 water bottlles in their pockets and inside their jerseys than to be a little more aerodynamic.


----------



## Samfujiabq (Jul 3, 2013)

The primary function of a helmet is to protect your head and to suit the wearers needs,not whether or not I'm A racer and it increases my times,but whether or not I simply like it for my own reasons.Liked it,bought it,and I paid for it just like I paid for everything else I own ,and not asking whether it makes me cute or fast.


----------



## Dunbar (Aug 8, 2010)

cxwrench said:


> In reality, it's true. Using Cav as an example, on the days he knows have a high probability of ending in sprint he will wear a skin suit and aero helmet.


Some riders choose wear aerodynamic helmets and ride aero frames. You see far more riders choosing to ride non-aero helmets and non-aero frames. Cav's chief rivals in the sprint stages, Andre Greipel and Peter Sagan, don't use aero helmets and Sagan doesn't use an aero frame. Greipel and Sagan managed to beat Cav in todays spring stage of the TDF. 

On a side note I can't wait to start seeing roadies riding around on training rides in skin suits after they've poked so much fun at tri geeks.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

Dunbar said:


> Some riders choose wear aerodynamic helmets and ride aero frames. You see far more riders choosing to ride non-aero helmets and non-aero frames. Cav's chief rivals in the sprint stages, Andre Greipel and Peter Sagan, don't use aero helmets and Sagan doesn't use an aero frame. Greipel and Sagan managed to beat Cav in todays spring stage of the TDF.
> 
> On a side note I can't wait to start seeing roadies riding around on training rides in skin suits after they've poked so much fun at tri geeks.


Isn't that exactly what i said? _Some_ riders, Cav being my example, choose to wear aero gear when it will be advantageous. I'm betting that if Greipel and Sagan had helmets available they'd use them in sprint stages. But since their sponsors don't make them, they can't use them. Sagan can't use an aero frame because Cannondale don't make one. Big difference between "don't" and "can't"...

And neither Greipel or Sagan crashed today and had to chase back on. I'm pretty sure Cav burned a few more matches during today's stage than they did.


----------



## velodog (Sep 26, 2007)

cxwrench said:


> Isn't that exactly what i said? _Some_ riders, Cav being my example, choose to wear aero gear when it will be advantageous. I'm betting that if Greipel and Sagan had helmets available they'd use them in sprint stages. But since their sponsors don't make them, they can't use them. Sagan can't use an aero frame because Cannondale don't make one. Big difference between "don't" and "can't"...
> 
> And neither Greipel or Sagan crashed today and had to chase back on. I'm pretty sure Cav burned a few more matches during today's stage than they did.


Sagan didn't crash, but he did flat at about 47/48k out. But unlike Cav he had team mates with him and got help back. And he had more time to recover than Cav.

And you are right, Greipel and Sagan sure would be using aero gear if they had access.


----------



## Samfujiabq (Jul 3, 2013)

Samfujiabq said:


> The primary function of a helmet is to protect your head and to suit the wearers needs,not whether or not I'm A racer and it increases my times,but whether or not I simply like it for my own reasons.Liked it,bought it,and I paid for it just like I paid for everything else I own ,and not asking whether it makes me cute or fast.


Oh it was the GIRO I purchased!


----------



## Dunbar (Aug 8, 2010)

Most of the pros in the Tour riding Specialized are on Tarmacs and not Venges. Same thing with Cervelo riders, they're mostly on R5's and not S5's. In the sea of helmets in the peloton I am not seeing many aero helmets.


----------



## pacific (Feb 20, 2013)

Dunbar said:


> In the sea of helmets in the peloton I am not seeing many aero helmets.


Actually, I see a Specialized S-Works Evade. 
View attachment 283553



From the Specialized site:

_"The S-Works Evade is the ultimate aerodynamic racing helmet..."


._


----------



## Dunbar (Aug 8, 2010)

pacific said:


> Actually, I see a Specialized S-Works Evade.


One aero helmet out of 20-30 riders in the picture. That would be consistent with my statement about not seeing many aero helmets.


----------



## deviousalex (Aug 18, 2010)

Dunbar said:


> One aero helmet out of 20-30 riders in the picture. That would be consistent with my statement about not seeing many aero helmets.


That's not the question to ask. The real question is out of how many teams that have access to aero helmets are the riders using aero helmets? I am betting that when Cannondale comes out with an aero bike Sagan will be on it for sprint stages.


----------



## stevesbike (Jun 3, 2002)

If you think aero helmets are stupid, I wonder what you think about the 'aero gloves' Greipel is wearing (on his aero bike in a skinsuit). Looks like a guy who's come in 2nd enough to want to get every marginal gain he can (and likely would wear an aero helment if his sponsor made one). 



Dunbar said:


> Some riders choose wear aerodynamic helmets and ride aero frames. You see far more riders choosing to ride non-aero helmets and non-aero frames. Cav's chief rivals in the sprint stages, Andre Greipel and Peter Sagan, don't use aero helmets and Sagan doesn't use an aero frame. Greipel and Sagan managed to beat Cav in todays spring stage of the TDF.
> 
> On a side note I can't wait to start seeing roadies riding around on training rides in skin suits after they've poked so much fun at tri geeks.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

stevesbike said:


> If you think aero helmets are stupid, I wonder what you think about the 'aero gloves' Greipel is wearing (on his aero bike in a skinsuit). Looks like a guy who's come in 2nd enough to want to get every marginal gain he can (and likely would wear an aero helment if his sponsor made one).


Excellent point...he's as aero as he can be given that he has to wear a Laser helmet. Dunbar is not asking the question properly, as nicely pointed out by deviousalex.


----------



## Dunbar (Aug 8, 2010)

stevesbike said:


> If you think aero helmets are stupid, I wonder what you think about the 'aero gloves' Greipel is wearing (on his aero bike in a skinsuit).


Never heard of aero gloves before but they sound pretty silly. I think the pros probably wear what their sponsors ask them to wear. Which makes it more interesting that so many in the pro peloton eschew aero gear even when they have the option of using it.


----------



## stevesbike (Jun 3, 2002)

Cavendish wears aero gloves too. In fact, most of the sprinters - Cavendish, Kittel, Greipel, etc. are wearing some aero stuff (Kittel wears an aero version of the uvex helmet). Besides, aero road helmets aren't bad looking. This is the reference for stupid looking helmets: 



Dunbar said:


> Never heard of aero gloves before but they sound pretty silly. I think the pros probably wear what their sponsors ask them to wear. Which makes it more interesting that so many in the pro peloton eschew aero gear even when they have the option of using it.


----------



## Dunbar (Aug 8, 2010)

I saw this LG Course aero helmet over on BF. IMO it actually looks pretty decent and they claim it's actually more aero than other aero road helmets above ~42km/h in their PDF (here is the link.) I paid $30 for my non-aero Giro helmet so all of these aero helmets seem way overpriced at $200-250 MSRP.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

Dunbar said:


> I saw this LG Course aero helmet over on BF. IMO it actually looks pretty decent and they claim it's actually more aero than other aero road helmets above ~42km/h in their PDF (here is the link.) *I paid $30 for my non-aero Giro helmet so all of these aero helmets seem way overpriced at $200-250 MSRP.*


You're really quite ignorant when it comes to R&D, design, testing, and yes...marketing, aren't you? You actually have no clue whats involved.


----------



## bvber (Apr 23, 2011)

deviousalex said:


> That's not the question to ask. The real question is out of how many teams that have access to aero helmets are the riders using aero helmets?


Watched T d F on TV today and saw quite a bit of Specialized S-Works Evade as well as Prevail. I would roughly estimate the ratio of 1:2 among Specialized brand.


----------



## Warpdatframe (Dec 9, 2012)

This thread is stupid because it's a bunch of people from different areas of road biking giving their opinion about aero helmets on the way they ride. Of course recreational riders aren't going to wear a salad bowl to save 10 watts. The target demographic of aero road helmets are road racers.

I hope we can all agree that aero road helmets:

1. Look stupid if your aren't racing
2. provide some aerodynamic benefit


----------



## Bigfred* (Jun 29, 2013)

warpdatframe said:


> i hope we can all agree that aero road helmets:
> 
> 1. Look stupid if you're racing and even more so if you aren't.
> 2. Might provide some aerodynamic benefit or may just be the latest fashion trend to be trotted out by manufacturers who couldn't remove any more material in the pursuit of "light" and still maintain any accreditations.


fify.


----------



## deviousalex (Aug 18, 2010)

Warpdatframe said:


> This thread is stupid because it's a bunch of people from different areas of road biking giving their opinion about aero helmets on the way they ride. Of course recreational riders aren't going to wear a salad bowl to save 10 watts. The target demographic of aero road helmets are road racers.
> 
> I hope we can all agree that aero road helmets:
> 
> ...


Are you implying that the guy on his Trek Speed Concept 9.9 with a Zipp 808 tubular front and disc rear wearing his Giro TT helmet on a training ride looks like a tool?


----------



## refthimos (Aug 15, 2008)

deviousalex said:


> From the BikeRadar article
> 
> In a 200m sprint at 1,000 Watts – an output approaching that which the pros can achieve – Specialized claim it gives a 2.6m improvement.
> 
> 2.6m is HUGE. I've lost 5 places in 2.6 meters before. Also, most Cat 2 sprinters I know can do 1,000 watt sprints as well so this is relevant to the average racer.


Cat 5 sprinters can do 1000W. So yes, I agree, this is relevant.

I was the first in my local group rides and local races to sport the Air Attack, back in March. They are out more and more - at last weekend's Manhattan Beach Grand Prix (an NCC race), there were more than a handful.

If you think this is just a trend and won't stick, you either don't race or you think deep section carbon wheels are also a fad that will let up any day now.


----------



## refthimos (Aug 15, 2008)

pulser955 said:


> Actually yes I do I race. And unless you are in clean air I can't see how it will do any good. With all the turbulent air coming off every thing around you and the wind that can be from any direction its useless.


You race, but do you win? Or do anything other than sit in? Because when you're sprinting for the win or working in the break to stay away, you're seeing plenty of clean air.


----------



## Warpdatframe (Dec 9, 2012)

Of course. It's imperative that you always train in race gear, tubulars and all. Anything to get that extra 5 watts.


----------



## deviousalex (Aug 18, 2010)

refthimos said:


> Cat 5 sprinters can do 1000W. So yes, I agree, this is relevant.
> 
> I was the first in my local group rides and local races to sport the Air Attack, back in March. They are out more and more - at last weekend's Manhattan Beach Grand Prix (an NCC race), there were more than a handful.
> 
> If you think this is just a trend and won't stick, you either don't race or you think deep section carbon wheels are also a fad that will let up any day now.


Oddly enough from my opinion it seems that in le tour this year the wheels aren't as deep as last year generally speaking.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

Movistar could have used some aero road helmet help the other day instead of the parachutes they were using.


----------



## refthimos (Aug 15, 2008)

deviousalex said:


> Oddly enough from my opinion it seems that in le tour this year the wheels aren't as deep as last year generally speaking.


That's fine and may be true but they are not exactly Mavic Open Pros either.


----------



## deviousalex (Aug 18, 2010)

Well here's a non-aero looking aero helmet. Maybe this will satisfy the fashion police? I'm guessing the other helmet in that pic is the Air Attack.

Review: Louis Garneau Course Aero Helmet


----------



## carbonLORD (Aug 2, 2004)

I'm in Paris right now, Aero wheels are still plenty deep...

I think it's an overal package. Just like you won't get a sub 15lbs bike by changing only one component. The aero benefit is through use of combining features like wheels, frame and even position.

When I used to sell MDT aero "fairings" in the 90's it wouldn't matter if you used one and turned your head left or right negating the aero benefits.

Now-a-day companies like Specialized who have invested in their own wind tunnel FCOL are bringing us better products and not resting on their laurels.

Companies like Zipp consider air buffering and deflection.

I personally am excited to be able to build onto my aero "package" (S-WORKS Venge on Enve 6.7's) and feel the Evade will be a perfect fit and, like the pros, the right tools for the job means I will use my tried tested and true Giro Atmos on hillier days, or days where I'm not riding L'Venge.


----------



## TheBaron (Jun 5, 2013)

pulser955 said:


> O god can we not have this argument? The aero advantage is totally useless to 90% of the people riding bikes. I will concede that it might help a pro.


Appearance is subjective so I get that you and some will not like the Evades appearance as you're never going to please everyone.


I do think the 2.6 metre saving on a 200 metre sprint at 1,000 watts is irrelevant to most as few can throw down this level of power.

Assuming you're capable of cycling at 40km/h (which I am and do), this helmet will save me 10 watts over my current Prevail. Some people will have inferior helmets to the Prevail so the watts saving will be higher. If I can save any watts then it means I can go faster or save energy going at the current speed, which is a huge plus to me.

As others have said these helmets are not aimed at everyone. As soon as it is available in the UK though. When they release another helmet in the future which is more performent to this one, I'll look to get that too.


----------



## deviousalex (Aug 18, 2010)

TheBaron said:


> I do think the 2.6 metre saving on a 200 metre sprint at 1,000 watts is irrelevant to most as few can throw down this level of power.


Uhh....most Cat 4 sprinters can do that. My team mate who's a cat 4 and 155lbs held 600 watts for one minute...


----------



## wjclint (Apr 17, 2012)

cxwrench said:


> I'm betting that if Greipel and Sagan had helmets available they'd use them in sprint stages. But since their sponsors don't make them, they can't use them.


Just ran across this thread. Good prediction! Milan-San Remo 2014: Andre Greipel (Lotto Belisol) Had Cramps In The Finale And..., Photos | Cyclingnews.com


----------



## Fireform (Dec 15, 2005)

My teammate is a cat 4 and can hit 1400. 1000 is no big deal


----------



## Creakyknees (Sep 21, 2003)

I'll just leave this here:










That's me, #302, winning a criterium earlier this year... wearing my Giro Air Attack (with the shield on). I can tell you unequivocally that the helmet makes me noticeably faster, at the speeds where the race is decided - such as the sprint in a criterium, or guttered in a crosswind in a road race. 

I compare the effect to being roughly equivalent to the difference between a nice set of aero wheels versus regular 32 spoke box rims. 

Whether it's "worth it" or not for you, is of course entirely up to you to decide.


----------



## redondoaveb (Jan 16, 2011)

Creakyknees said:


> I'll just leave this here:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Congratulations on the win. Why aren't you waving?


----------



## ziscwg (Apr 19, 2010)

Creakyknees said:


> I'll just leave this here:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


It seems that any one thing does not make you faster by a decent amount. It's when you start stacking them together that things can matter. If you had the wheels, the helmet, the bars, the frame all adding up to 4%, would it be worth it?

Only you can answer.


----------



## Dunbar (Aug 8, 2010)

Creakyknees said:


> I can tell you unequivocally that the helmet makes me noticeably faster, at the speeds where the race is decided


The problem with perception is that it isn't very scientific. You have to go by what the wind tunnel testing shows which is anywhere from a few watts up to about 10 watts of savings at 30mph.


----------



## SauronHimself (Nov 21, 2012)

Creakyknees said:


> I'll just leave this here:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


And you were straight-armed in the drops, too.

P.S. You were #302.


----------



## No Time Toulouse (Sep 7, 2016)

Hey, spambot...thanks for resurrecting a dead thread from 6 years ago! Oh, and for adding a hyperlink to the site you're shilling for....


----------



## jetdog9 (Jul 12, 2007)

At least it's Thursday.

Curiosity overwhelming... must... press... link... not.


----------



## MMMhills (Jan 13, 2016)

All the little things do add up, just saying!


----------



## 4slomo (Feb 11, 2008)

It depends on how fast you ride.


----------



## Clipped_in (May 5, 2011)

looigi said:


> If a helmet fits well and ventilates well, there's no sense it not be aero.


Point well taken. I love my Giro Synthe. It is light, comfortable, quiet, will theoretically protect my mellon in a crash, and has great little ports for my glasses. It also happens to be aero...


----------



## kapusta (Apr 26, 2004)

Most of us already look completely ridiculous in our riding clothes. This helmet is no worse.


----------

