[CR]Re: Mudguards again

Example: History

From: CYCLESTORE@aol.com
Date: Sun, 6 Jul 2003 20:40:42 EDT
To: classicrendezvous-request@bikelist.org, classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
Subject: [CR]Re: Mudguards again

In a message dated 6/18/03 12:18:18 PM, classicrendezvous-request@bikelist.org writes:
>Yep, me too. I ride with fenders a lot and like the look of a "properly
>dressed" randonneuring bicycle. That said, I have never felt they offer
>aerodynamic advantage. Quite the opposite, actually. Strong side winds
>passing trucks shake the front end of the bike more with fenders than
>without. Like Curt, I would like to see the proof from Jan about his claim.
>After 30+ years in the bike game I have never heard this one before.
>Bill Bryant
>Santa Cruz, CA

Hi Bill and all,

I agree with Bill on the look and style of properly mounted mudguards. Some bikes are much better and some fenders are work better with some bikes.

On the aero advantage, Jan's comments of tire proximity, fit and forward extension may have merit.

In the mid-seventies Bike World magazine one respected author making a list of training and equipment tips for time trialing offered the idea that full length rear fenders mounted front and rear provided an aero dynamic benefit. No proof was offered but the known fact the whirling spokes of a wheel provide a significant air drag that a fairing or cowling can reduce is well understood. A fairing covering the sides of full fenders would have a significant performance improvement it would seem.

On a side note I am constantly amazed that my small wheel Moulton bike (with mudguards) is much faster downhill than my bike wheel bikes (without fenders) alone or in company. The wee wheel doesn't chop much air. As with mudguards, aero research with extremely small wheels is infrequent and not widely published.

Yours in Cycling,

Gilbert Anderson

North Road Bicycle Company 519 W. North St. Raleigh, NC 27603 USA Toll Free Ph: 800\u2022321\u20225511 Local Ph: 919\u2022828\u20228999 E-mail: cyclestore@aol.com