http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Topic: Headwinds... worse on a light bike? en Wed, 13 May 2026 02:35:02 +0000 http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2471&page=2#post-26672 Sat, 12 Mar 2011 13:32:30 +0000 wingpig 26672@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Also, heavier touringy cycles might be slim-tubed steel, presumably more likely to be able to ignore wind compared to oversized-tube aluminium. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2471&page=2#post-26670 Sat, 12 Mar 2011 12:59:07 +0000 Cyclingmollie 26670@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Wingpig, you're right about that I think. Wind resistance probably rises as the square of the speed and that resistance would have a different value based on the clothing worn and even the bike used. </p> <p>To get back on topic, I think that a heavy bike with touring geometry will be easier to control in the wind. That's because the force of the wind on the rider will be less likely to cause the bike to lean turn and the force of the wind will be less able to affect the bike's higher inertia, especially the rotating inertia of the heavier wheels. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2471&page=2#post-26652 Fri, 11 Mar 2011 20:34:41 +0000 wingpig 26652@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Whereas everyone's subject to the same gravitational acceleration (as long as they're in the same place) wind-drag would vary markedly from person/cycle combination to person/cycle combination. I suppose by measuring the rate of speed reduction from/at various speeds one could establish the wind-caused deceleration to which a particular rider/cycle/clothing/etc. combination is subject to at a range of speeds, though it would ignore differences in other frictions which would also vary with speed. That would be easy enough to convert to an effective equivalent to a particular gradient's rearward gravitational tug experienced for a given speed. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2471&page=2#post-26651 Fri, 11 Mar 2011 20:05:00 +0000 Cyclingmollie 26651@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>When I put the power calculator onto the Arthur's Seat Challenge site I had to discount the effect of head or tailwinds because it was too complex. The formula without counting wind is this:</p> <p>9.81*w*7.8*(1180/t)/118<br /> where 9.81 is gravity<br /> w is weight of bike and rider in kilograms<br /> t is time taken in seconds<br /> 7.8/118 is the gradient<br /> 1180 is the distance in metres</p> <p>and that has to be turned into JavaScript to work on the site.</p> <p>There are online calculators that are much more sophisticated than that and take account of wind speed etc. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2471&page=2#post-26644 Fri, 11 Mar 2011 18:29:44 +0000 wingpig 26644@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I don't suppose anyone's ever done or heard of a scientific comparison of the impediment caused by headwinds of various speeds on the flat compared to the extra work required for forward motion on various gradients of upwards slope? Wind always seems the worded but that's probably entirely subjective due to it feeling like nothing but an impediment whereas heading upslope feels like it's achieving something. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2471&page=2#post-26642 Fri, 11 Mar 2011 18:19:28 +0000 chdot 26642@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Experiment over - wind seems to have dropped! </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2471&page=2#post-26565 Fri, 11 Mar 2011 10:24:33 +0000 kaputnik 26565@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Confesion time. I passed a green MTB at the Forestry Commission this morning who then sped up and tried to hitch a free ride off of me. I wasn't having any of thatso went up a gear or two and dropped him back into the gale - apologies if it was anyone on here but if I was working hard into the headwind, so was everyone else going to! </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2471&page=2#post-26563 Fri, 11 Mar 2011 10:07:32 +0000 chdot 26563@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>In addition to the resolving mass/gyroscope theory, it seems likely that as the headwind/gusts mean slower progress, lighter wheels will make instability more noticeable(?) </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2471&page=2#post-26562 Fri, 11 Mar 2011 09:55:47 +0000 Nelly 26562@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I dont know what the answer is to this question - however I can say that my commute this morning (particularly along the broomhouse wind tunnel) toward edinburgh park was torture.</p> <p>The gusts almost made me stop at some points, and I seriously thought someone must have broken into my hut and poured sand/treacle into my bottom bracket.</p> <p>I can only hope the gusts keep up for the ride home !!</p> <p>p.s. Today was on the heavy beat up hack MTB with mudguards, road slicks etc </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2471#post-26496 Thu, 10 Mar 2011 12:52:20 +0000 kaputnik 26496@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Maybe it's windier on the day we rode our light bikes to the day we rode our heavier bikes? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2471#post-26491 Thu, 10 Mar 2011 12:37:34 +0000 wingpig 26491@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I'd've thought a tourer-style longer trail would reduce the inclination of the front wheel to suffer from twitchiness and windgrab. Whilst a higher seating position would increase the area exposed to the wind the greater the height of the C.O.G. above the ground the greater the stability (at a given speed, which it would be more difficult to achieve in the higher position). </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2471#post-26484 Thu, 10 Mar 2011 12:18:14 +0000 chdot 26484@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Ah yes, "mass" - "words mean specific things". </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2471#post-26483 Thu, 10 Mar 2011 12:15:26 +0000 Cyclingmollie 26483@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Yes, the inertia of the rotating mass of the wheels should make a heavier bike more stable. Or perhaps that stability and reluctance to change direction makes it harder to balance. Where's Arrelcat? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2471#post-26478 Thu, 10 Mar 2011 11:53:53 +0000 chdot 26478@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Now we are in the realms of physics where words mean specific things and I'm not sure this will be correct -</p> <p>"and all that angular momentum"</p> <p>So - gyroscope effect/inertia of heavier rims/tyres - revolving weight = double static weight - may well be the answer to "headwinds" question. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2471#post-26477 Thu, 10 Mar 2011 11:45:17 +0000 Cyclingmollie 26477@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I think the twitchy handling of a race bike would be better in the wind as the bike reacts faster. But the lightness would count against it. The old, heavy sit up and beg bikes felt really stable because of their weight and all that angular momentum in the wheels (or was it inertia)?</p> <p><a href="http://davesbikeblog.squarespace.com/blog/category/bicycle-design">Dave Moulton</a> knows a lot about frame geometry. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2471#post-26475 Thu, 10 Mar 2011 11:18:21 +0000 kaputnik 26475@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>That was a braw drouth this morning... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2471#post-26466 Thu, 10 Mar 2011 09:05:35 +0000 chdot 26466@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"I'm probably missing the point about how it changes the bikes reaction to a headwind"</p> <p>Only in the sense that it's unlikely that the wind is full head-on and constant. </p> <p>Also however hard you grip the handlebars (not usually a good idea), everytime you pedal the bike moves (slightly) left or right depending on which foot is going down. </p> <p>SPDs or toeclips can make a difference if it means a difference in pedal style from normal/unclipped. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2471#post-26449 Thu, 10 Mar 2011 01:33:32 +0000 Smudge 26449@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Yup, follow that,race bikes are built to turn and touring bikes are built to be stable, but how does that affect headwinds, I can see it (sporty geometry) making a bike more flighty and nervous in sidewinds but I'm probably missing the point about how it changes the bikes reaction to a headwind. Apologies in advance if I'm being a bit dim! </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2471#post-26444 Wed, 09 Mar 2011 23:17:58 +0000 kaputnik 26444@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/kaputniq/5489369981/"><img src="http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5292/5489369981_e3dfc3b774.jpg"></a></p> <p>Exhibit A </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2471#post-26443 Wed, 09 Mar 2011 23:11:38 +0000 druidh 26443@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Steeper head angle means faster, sharper handling. Touring bikes tend to have slacker head angles. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2471#post-26329 Wed, 09 Mar 2011 09:57:10 +0000 Smudge 26329@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@ Druidh, Serious question, how do you mean the geometry affecting it? I don't follow what you mean. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2471#post-26315 Wed, 09 Mar 2011 07:29:43 +0000 steveo 26315@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I'm in two minds, on the one hand the heavier mtb doesn't get as buffeted, on the other the light roadie has drops. I did notice the road bike try to kill me yesterday when the wind caught the front end and carbon forks were just about swept away, the suspension forks don't have this problem. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2471#post-26312 Wed, 09 Mar 2011 07:13:48 +0000 Smudge 26312@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>lol, was thinking about the MTB this morning as I look out on snow :-o however I'm supposed to be going on a training run this morning mid morning so... hmmm maybe take the roadbike and hope the main roads are ok :-/</p> <p>Your carbon superbike* (tm all the glossy magazines) should be fine as long as you take plenty of pitons and rope to get yourself out if you fall in any of Edinburghs spectacular potholes ;-) </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2471#post-26301 Wed, 09 Mar 2011 00:38:21 +0000 druidh 26301@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Hmm - might take the MTB and commute back up the WoL tomorrow evening. It may be dark and muddy, but it's a lot more sheltered than the Lanark Road!</p> <p>As regards the OP, it suspect it the geometry at fault rather than the weight(though it may be a bit of both). My lighter bike is carbon though, so I don't take it out on windy days lest a strong gust snaps it clean in two :-) </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2471#post-26299 Wed, 09 Mar 2011 00:23:49 +0000 kaputnik 26299@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>Two more days to test the theories </em></p> <p>Assume full aero-crouch all the way to work. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2471#post-26296 Tue, 08 Mar 2011 23:56:50 +0000 splitshift 26296@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>just in from work, wet cold bikes being blasted by hail after 11 hour shifts deffo get blown about more ! </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2471#post-26295 Tue, 08 Mar 2011 23:49:20 +0000 wee folding bike 26295@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Pashley blew over this afternoon when I was getting the trailer out of the garage.</p> <p>It bent the right hand crank so it was hitting the chain guard. I bent it back with a big Bahco shifting spanner (I know, aluminium, stress fractures).</p> <p>I should probably put a single pannier on the left, that's where the stand is. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2471#post-26294 Tue, 08 Mar 2011 23:43:25 +0000 chdot 26294@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Two more days to test the theories -</p> <p><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/chdot/5510636764"><img src="http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5098/5510636764_4a04d059c0.jpg"><br /> </a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2471#post-26275 Tue, 08 Mar 2011 18:39:29 +0000 Smudge 26275@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Well, going by the voting the jury is in and my suspicions are well founded, on a windy day take the heavy bike ;-)<br /> @Winpig, got to agree, I reckon one of the best upgrades I've made to bikes is lighter/stiffer wheels (and the associated better quality bearings often). Transforms the feel of a bike imho. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2471#post-26263 Tue, 08 Mar 2011 17:04:41 +0000 wingpig 26263@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I shall have to strap my new wheel to my backpack very securely to avoid being twisted about on the walk home.<br /> I've only the one bike to check but don't think headwinds were any less irritating on my old steel-framed road bike compared to my current fatter-piped but slightly lighter aluminium job. I can notice the difference at speed if my mudguards aren't attached and definitely noticed a difference when I briefly used a spare old front wheel the other week, though don't know if that was the greater number of spokes or the absence of aero rims. </p>