And when you factor in that you could net 20 from wheels, a few from an aero road bar, it’s hard to justify all the other hardware (frameset) to save 10-12 watts.
Seems reasonable for a 2015 bike with no aero wheels compared to a superbike like the S5. 20 of those watts are probably wheels.
The more interesting conclusion though is that most aero bikes provide similar benefits.
Which bike is the fastest?
Although the Specialized Tarmac came out on top in our rider-on-bike test, closely followed by the Trek Madone and the Factor OSTRO VAM, our margin of confidence means that on another day, any of the bikes could have landed on top.
Good news for those that don’t want a full on aero bike:
From the bike-only data, the results appear cleaner, with more consistent results across the seven yaw angles. The top of the table is packed with the more dedicated aero bikes such as the Factor, Scott and Cervelo, but the more ‘all-rounder’ bikes hold their own well at around 2-5 watts behind.
My conclusion, buy the aeroish bike that you like the best - looks, ride, handling, whatever. They are all pretty close.
But if you are trying to do group rides or race against hard hitters on your 2015 bike without aero wheels, you are leaving watts on the table. At least get some wheels and fast tires and you’ll close a lot of the gap. Also get rid of your flappy jersey and maybe get an aero helmet as it provides half the benefit of an aero frame at 1/10th the cost.
Totally agree. I don’t buy all those aero gains on a frameset. There’s lots of improvements, some of them at very low-cost, or even free. As @OreoCookie suggested once, Yoga classes will save you more watts than an aerobike.
Decent clothing, decent position (and keep it longer, not just ride 3 min) are the starting point.
With that being said, decent wheels and tires are sort of a “must have” to be “there”. An aero handlebar also is interesting.