The power equation shows that the aerodynamic drag is a function of the speed squared. This is a big issue, because the faster you go, the more energy it takes to maintain that speed. Again we have the about the same ratio for improving the system as we did in the weight analogy. Bicycle aerodynamics are a function of frontal area. The frontal area is maybe 80 to 90% made up by the rider. You can only improved the human element by an improved position, such as a flat back, head down and elbow tucked in. The human element can be thought of as a constant, which then leaves designers to improve on only the bicycle system. A small change in reducing drag will result in a significant improvement in the system at higher speeds.

The easiest thing to improve on your bike is to simply install low drag wheels, mainly the front one or the leading edge. Bases on the studies we've read the rear wheel's aerodynamic effectiveness is not clearly defined because you have the riders legs disturbing the air prior to the rear wheel. The leading edge then becomes the most important. There has been a number private and industry funded studies on wheel drag, which have resulted in such products as aerodynamic rim profiles, bladed spokes, disc, three and four spoke composite wheels and high tensioned 12-16 spoke wire spoke wheels.

The frame is the last component of the bicycle to undergo an aerodynamic analysis. In preparation for the 1996 summer Olympics GM provided major funding and wind tunnel testing which resulted in the SB2 (super bike 2). The resulting SB2 frame geometry ended up looking a lot like the ZR. To gain that final competitive edge the Americas looked at the frame in detail because it was one of the last elements to be optimized.

Extensive wind tunnel testing at Texas A&M and Cal Tech was completed by Chester Kyle around 1987 when the UCI changed their ruling to allow beam bikes. One of main findings in their study was that rider positioning on the bike in a wind tunnel typically yielded variability of about +/- 0.45 N (0.1 pounds) in drag data. With bike only the variation was +/- 0.13 N (0.03 pounds). The conclusion of the study was that "unique aerodynamic frames are definitely superior to standard frames. The measured drag with or without riders was uniformly lower than bikes with round tubes."

The unique aerodynamic frames, which Kyle tested were very early prototypes of frames which resembled "lotus and superbike2 " geometry (see "illegal frames for the Y2K" page 14 of the website). They also wind tunnel tested a Cannondale, with its oversized Aluminum tubes and a classical road bike GIOS with round steel tubes. Table 1 below is a summary of their findings. The same rider was used for all the testing, 6 ft. 2 in. and 77 Kgm (170 lbs).