Is Less Weight Better Than Aero? Giant Propel vs Factor O2 VAM timed comparison

[@KeatB]

So after years of manufacturers telling us “aero is everything”, now every one has bought an aero bike they’re on to “lightness is everything “. It’s almost like they’re driving their sales agenda by telling us we “need” what we don’t already have….

[@biggertree7063]

Rimbrakes are the future. Again.

[@mattdavis855]

I always think it's funny when people say stuff like this as if bike companies are forcing you to buy their bikes at gunpoint. Just don't buy a new bike?

[@KeatB]

@@mattdavis855 I always think it’s funny when people are so naive as to think the brands don’t have a strategy to drive sales. Ps. I don’t have a new bike. Still running rim brakes on my summer bike….

[@onepunchbud1472]

​@@biggertree7063actually I still think they are better in many areas, so yes... And lighter 👍

[@devinmorrison7131]

THIS GUY HAS GOT IT RIGHT@@biggertree7063

[@clinlashway9147]

On the climb, the light bike was 13 seconds faster out of about 4:30. That's around 5% faster. The weight difference of the bikes is 1.5 kg. For 1.5 kg to create a 5% difference, the total weight of bike and rider would have to be only ~30 kg. Something else is going on here. My guess is wind changes, or maybe the aero bike isn't as aero because of rider position. The Factor appears to have more drop from the saddle to the bars. So, maybe has a more aggressive rider position. Concerning total time, the average power was 5 W lower or ~2% less power, 220 vs 225 W. If all loses were aero and therefore all power proportional to the cube of speed, you could multiply the 31.9 kph by cube root (225/220) to get 32.14 kph, which is almost as fast. Given a significant percentage of loses are still linear with speed, the 5 W would make an even larger difference. Point is, I think the more aero bike might have been faster for the whole course, if the power would have been the same. While I appreciate the effort, I really think it is a mistake to draw any conclusions from this. The results indicate there is something different, other than bike weight and bike aero characteristics between the runs. We know average power wasn't the same. Quite likely the wind was different and any temperature differences could have created different air densities. It's why these real-world tests are so hard to do well. You can't control test conditions. With these small differences, you really need to run multiple tests in optimal (low wind) conditions.

[@dainiusvysniauskas2049]

Well, he has to make Factor happy for the sponsorship money they paid, so strings will be pulled to make Factor look better than it is

[@user-zm9gc1kt8b]

@@dainiusvysniauskas2049 Yep!!! Money talks

[@Dee-Ell]

The whole "test" is just silly. I think it was a clickbait video to get people to watch and comment, and as another excuse to showcase the sponsor's bike.

[@davidarthur]

What a load of nonsense @dainiusvysniauskas2049 sorry you're so cynical you believe that, but it couldn't be further from the truth

[@davidarthur]

Sorry you feel it was a clickbait video @Dee-Ell but I can assure you it wasn't a sponsored video, must be hard being so cynical all the time eh?

[@rayjones8853]

Hard to justify anything if the power wasn't the same

[@jwfriar]

Yup - 1.2% faster time, but 2.3% more power. So actually the aero bike was faster adjusted for power

[@pooochiemoomoos2150]

@@jwfriar maybe... maybe not. Relationship is not linear

[@jwfriar]

@@pooochiemoomoos2150 true, but he also put more power on the climb with the lightweight bike. As we know, saving your power on the climb is more efficient use vs putting it out on a decent. A true test needs consistent power across all sections. Either way, the test was biased towards the lightweight bike.

[@TrickyTree84]

Maybe it was easier to put out more power if the ride was better

[@davidarthur]

@jwfriar The average power was the same on the climb, I didn't make more effort on the climb, and no the test was not biased towards the lightweight aero bike

[@JustSueMe]

People act as if aero bikes weigh 15 kgs, and lightweight climbing bikes weigh around 3 kg. The difference between a similarly specced lightweight bike and an aero bike is like 500 grams. Unless you are specifically aiming to participate in hill climbing events, the aero option is going to be faster in every other scenario.

[@richardmiddleton7770]

The lighter rims make the biggest difference.

[@cpandsooz]

Totally agree. I looked at same size Propel and the new TCR Advanced and the difference was really minimal. However best advise but what you like and will be most applicable to your majority rides Propel for me.

[@benbrindle8165]

@@richardmiddleton7770there’s not nearly enough torque, mass, or changes in speed (therefore momentum) for the rim or any rotating mass, to effect more than any other grams. Rotating mass for all but stop-starts has been debunked plenty.

[@benbrindle8165]

You’ve not mentioned the factor is also an aero bike here until the end. While you have mentioned that the propel was more aero. My takeaway is that. I saw two wins for the propel, objectively. For the average consumer (otherwise you’d buy the 6kg same spec propel not the factor, duh): 1) the 6kg propel worth the same money and level spec of the factor, would be far quicker 2) the lower end 4k aero bikes close the gap to the 12k lightweight bikes

[@8rk]

I also enjoyed how we ignored the 5w difference on average between the two test rides to make a point.

[@davidarthur]

Think that made all the difference?

[@8rk]

@@davidarthur yeah. the difference was so small 5 watt would make the it I believe.

[@8rk]

16 seconds out of a 21 minute segment!

[@peko6411]

David you are great, but I'd like sth to explain. First ride: Propel 15:24+5:14 = 20:40, Factor 16:09+5:02 = 21:11. Second ride (test results): Propel 21:30, Factor 21:14. The difference 3 sec between first and second ride for Factor is believable. The difference 50 sec between first and second ride for Propel is unbelievable for this short distance. What heppened between these rides? Thanks for the reply.

[@joharimohd6390]

Lightweight bikes feels snappier and more responsive to ride. More comfortable than an aero bike with an aero position too. A aero bike frame has less drag (marginal gains) with a more aero riding position (uncomfortable but probably makes more of a drag saving than the actual frame). Read faster. Choose your poison

[@Andy_ATB]

I'd always go for a lightweight bike; not that I don't believe in aero, but it's the constant stopping/ starting in real world situations that make me feel aero isn't a massive advantage.

[@jwfriar]

Totally true - aero wins on long sustained runs. But in my area I get stopped or have to slow a lot.

[@stevocanuck]

You’re not stopping in a race.

[@davidcraig2532]

I have an Aero bike. But i got it for looks rather than performance as it is like a piece of art in my eyes. These minute performance gains on the road on either side of the argument between lightweight and aero i think mean very little to the average rider out there. They do to me. One may mean 5 seconds differnce on a flat or a hill, which then counts for nothing when i have a pee stop in a field scaring the local sheep😂, or slow down on a ascent to enjoy the incredible views during a climb.

[@brentcharlton1065]

More on this Giant please! How much can you improve it against the SL? Wheel swap, etc. Love it! Thank you!

[@gaza4543]

David the reason us normal folk go for lightweight bikes is because every pedal stroke feel amazing the bike dances around underneath you, areo bikes they just feel sluggish ( though are normally faster). It’s the feeling more than anything. And I’d take a lightweight bike any day just for the feeling. But 11.8k fully built and 6k for a frame they can shove it where sun doesn’t shine it’s just crazy. I’ll take the winspace slc for 1400 quid. Might no be quite so polished build wise but its dam close.

[@ivanyhtang]

​@@Dali6266could you please elaborate on the ride quality of lightweight vs aero? I've only ridden a lightweight but interested in modern aero all-rounders (not pure aero), though I've heard people say aero bikes aren't enjoyable as they feel dead and soul-less. What does this actually mean in terms of ride feel/quality? Is it that lightweight frames have more spring in them and aero bikes aren't snappy due to its stiffness? If so, isn't snap more about frame geometry? Cheers

[@ivanyhtang]

@@Dali6266 thanks for sharing! I've been eyeing a Factor Ostro VAM which to my understanding is very similar in category as SL7/SL8 (aero all-rounder). My unsubstantiated fear in getting one of these is that others have described them as fast and agile but not enjoyable because they are lifeless. That might be totally fine for racers and high performance athletes but I'm just an average lightweight rider. Of course it's not really possible to test ride for any significant time before buying. Cheers!

[@ciprianclint]

I really appreciate the time David puts into his work, brings up interesting bikes and most time valuable information for the rest of is but it seems to me that everyone ran out of ideas, either go to Chinese frames and components or re visit old topics like aero vs weight, rim vs disc, the reality is that any bike under 8kg is competitive, fun to ride , flat or hills if all components are carefully matched and mechanically in top shape. Even at the pro level de marginal difference between brands hardly matters , at no point was TDF won on a superior bike but by a superior rider .

[@jwfriar]

I’ll bet that S5 is faster than the V4RS, but you swap bikes and Jonas still wins 100%. His team helped too. I think the biggest thing is Jonas better prepared, better strategy, had batter health luck, didn’t ride too many grand tours before and was ready for that time trial.

[@SimonGoesSideways]

You should have swapped the wheels over and done the test again. I bet the propel with the blackinc wheels wouldn’t have lost 13 secs to the Factor. And probably still would be faster on the rest of the course. Conclusion, get the propel, set of light wheels from winspace/craft etc and have a faster bike on flats and climbs for just over half the price of the factor !!!

[@DerekGreen123]

Yeah the Craft Racing Works CRW CS5055's are similar weight to the BlackInc wheels (around 1250g) and much deeper section (so should be more aero)... and at $1700 probably a lot cheaper too.

[@SimonGoesSideways]

@@DerekGreen123 yeh exactly , 100gr heavier than the blackinc wheels and half the price , plus much deeper.

[@sabaffira]

Climbing wheels on the factor and aero wheels on the Giant. Wheels make a huge difference. Much more than the frames would.

[@CarlBaravelli]

That is interesting. In a race, I can usually sit on wheel on flatter terrain, whereas it is on a climb people are generally dropped. Also the 5w difference may also explain the very small diff between the two bikes. You need to add an uncertainty value to your estimates to account for unexplained variables

[@jakebailey146]

This is a really good point. A lot of this depends on how you race (if you race it probably doesn't matter), and on what type or terrain you are making your race gains. Unless you are Erik Dekkering off the front, does the aero matter that much when you are in the bunch?

[@JADybvaagLea]

The new Giant Propel Advanced Pro 0 is the best value bike in the marked right now and is the best bike I ever had. Same geometry as the TCR gives it a fun and nimble ride. Much faster then the Scott Addict RC Pro that I had before. I guess it beats the Ostro Vam in most courses besides a long climb.

[@pascanlon1]

How about riding a Trek Emonda SLR Rim brake circa 2018 on the same route against a new lightweight bike, now that would be interesting

[@pej0s]

7:53 so the light bike was 0.3 kph faster and 5 watts didn't matter?

[@speakfuco]

Propel 15:24+5:14 = 20:40 (21:30 in the video) Factor 16:09+5:02 = 21:11 (21:14 in the video) Something doesn't add up, how come propel got an additional 50 sec out of thin air.

[@davidarthur]

Because there was other riding besides the two sections I zoomed in to focus on which is where you are getting confused - the numbers are all straight from Strava

[@speakfuco]

@@davidarthur if you are comparing equal distances it is almost impossible. for factor other sections should be taken 3 seconds and on giant 50 seconds. unless you overlap segments that you've been comparing. Still, something in the numbers is not matching, maybe check them again?

[@JoeriVerraest]

I actually joined the channel because it says ‘Just ride bikes’. Unbelievable how many people react like this, when it doesn’t even matter to us, normal people. Just have fun, ride lightweight; ride aero, do what makes you feel alive! And ride safe :)

[@alandowney5851]

One major factor that is never taken into account in these timed comparisons is the energy used to accelerate the bike. The heavier bike needs more. Most rides are not TT's on closed roads. For example, if you are riding a criterium where you are constantly accelerating and drafting (thus negating a large amount of any aero advantage), the lighter bike is bound to be more efficient. And obviously your position on the bike is far more important than a couple of aero frame tubes. A lot of aero bikes are more aero purely because of geometry that forces the rider to adopt a flatter position.

[@ChinCycling]

Nice video Dave but the power difference can’t be ignored, 5 watts is major, you’re a human and it’s almost impossible to do exactly the same power on both runs but I think that 5 watts would’ve put the Giant in front

[@kokonanana1]

Agree!

[@ryoukokonpaku1575]

5 watts definitely would add up in a long ride. If we factor that back I also think the propel would've been faster overall.

[@stevekurian7131]

Love the t-shirt David. I bought a few from Howies from your recommendation. Thank you!

[@davidarthur]

Glad you like them!

[@jwfriar]

You rode the Lightweight bike 1.2% faster than the Aero bike, but with 2.3% more power. So suggesting the aero bike was faster is inaccurate. The aero bike is faster if you were to ride with the same power.

[@dh7314]

Buy the bike that looks nicest and you enjoy riding the most. You can have the lightest fastest bike ever but if it looks like garbage or isn’t fun you’ll not be itching to get out on it. You buy bikes with your heart, not your head.

[@ierefaanbatchelor2578]

It would of been really interesting if you ran another loop on the Propel with the Black Inc wheels 😊

[@dr_tate]

What if you tested the Top Range Giant Propell vs the Factor. They would be closer to the same price and weight.

[@Runner9264]

How about comparing the lightweight Giant propel vs the factor with 50mm or 60mm wheels? Wont that be a good comparo?

[@chrisdavis8399]

David have you done a top 5 climbing specific road bike video lately?

[@Questioneverything72]

David, overall your Avg power on Factor was 5 watts more.and in climb 2 watts more. So if you even that out they might have had same time… anyways Tx for doing this. But as expected lighter bike goes faster on climb and Aero goes faster on non climb sections and overall it all depends on the profile of the whole route. How much climb, how much flat.

[@jwfriar]

Not only that - it’s where you put in your power. You do better on a course by upping power on climbs bc a higher % of the power moves you forward with less wind resistance which increases exponentially with speed. If you put that power down on the downhill, you get less overall speed out of it. A fair test is not only same power, but same power during the same segments. It all really does matter.

[@jimthebikeguy]

Aero bikes at the top end are so light now (as you say, giant do a version of the propel that goes sub 7kg), that you can have your cake and eat it. One of my customers has an SL7 and an aethos, which are comparable to the bikes in this video. The SL7 is considerably quicker across a ride; but i reckon its because it has a set of roval 50s on... I wonder if you put those wheels on the aethos would it go faster. Basically, are the real gains in the wheels and tires?

[@TrickyTree84]

Don't underestimate comfort

[@neildempsey36]

How about doing TCR to PROPEL same price category

[@PauloSerra]

Interesting topic and comparison, I do find there is a piece of the puzzle that can be misleading. Tires ! Tires make a massive difference on this sort of tests, if they are not the same ... It has been shown that premium wheels with budget tires are a bit slower than premium tires on budget wheels so ... Eliminating that variable, ok, we can compare better the aero and weigth contributions to it.

[@spdaltid]

An entertaining episode David. Of course, it is easy to pick holes in the testing 'science', but not a bad subjective analysis. I'm guessing the 'break even' answer is as Cannondale surmises: about 6% inclination.

[@gs78798]

Thanks for the video David! And thanks for all the effort that went into testing and creating a video! Unfortunately I think there is somewhere a mistake in the numbers: The overall times are not the same as the sum of the section-times. Can you please check the numbers again? I totally believe that you are unbiased and want to create good videos for us. Especially your comments on ride feel are very insightful! Thanks for that! But please check the numbers again or maybe give a hint how we can understand the given numbers better. Part of me is definitely a numbers guy thats why I'm so interested. 😊

[@aldrinclementina4297]

David you are fast. 32 and 31 km/h ave?! 👏🏽 How did you do the effort comparison on Strava? 🤔

[@Music-pq8cm]

Gotta wonder. If riding in the draft most of the time (group rides or races), will a highly aero bike yield much of benefit? Certainly, aero will help if you’re a solo rider … in solo time trials and solo break always or very small group breakaways (like 2-4 riders). I’m thinking perhaps lighter weight will generally yield more benefit for the money in group ride situations (and especially hilly rides/races) … unless you’re a breakaway beast and don’t intend to be drafting much. All these test videos use a solo rider with no drafting.

[@MicroageHD]

I used to race like this with my extremely light bike. Wheel sucking all day and at the end, on the 14% climb, drop everyone with the lighter weight.

[@holdenc1006]

Awesome review as always. Can’t helpbut wonder how propel sl would compare against vam as the weight gap gets narrower and crazy expensive cadex wheel set entersthe equation. Though Advanced sl is expensive, this top of the line vam is off the charts. Just for reference (I live in Brisbane on a deserted island called Australia and we just dont have as many stuff available to us); the price of the factor would be near as makes no difference 20k here whereas propel advanced pro 0 is less than 8k. So, if i may say that, a bit sort of unfair to giant, comparison wise. Another note is, depends on the gradiant you ride on most times; money is no object: go buy a super light and an aero; money is an object and you live in a city like Brisbane where your route inevitably goes over hills, up and down, upp and downn, nonstop: go buy lightweight; then advanced sl is both light weight and aero (minus the one peace handlebar) but still a tcr advanced pro zero worth of money cheaper than vam. So the gist was it was advanced sl that needs to be pit against vam. Thanks a lot.

[@bryantaaffe8357]

I wonder how the Giant SL @ 6.9kg would compare? The fact is Aero bikes are getting lighter. Also, the Giant tyres are slow, the factor will have top end tyres (you would hope at over £11K) great video.

[@DavidLamon]

Depends or where you live and what you do. Living in the Alps, my classic routes never have more than 10% of flat sections, so lightweight definitely wins. Not sure it will be the case if I lived in the flat countryside

[@benp3639]

Lightweight will always be faster going up hill. However, too many variables to make this a fair test. And I say that preferring the feel of a lighter bike.

[@matlindell5022]

It would be interesting to test the new Orbea orca😉👍

[@davidarthur]

Hopefully I can get one to ride soon

[@Runner9264]

The quality of ride should lean towards the lightweight factor. Easier to slap it around. The giant will obviously feel listless with the additional kg. Compare the light giant u tested and u might feel differently.

[@user-zm9gc1kt8b]

Yes it would have been interesting to know if you had changed the wheels !

[@garybird8646]

The Trek Emonda SLR with Dura ace and portly 1400 gram Paradigm wheels weighed in at 6.2kgs and sold for 5k in 2014. Disc brakes increased the weight of bikes considerably after this period and none of my climbing times have got close to riding a demo Trek SLR from this period.

[@pascanlon1]

I have Built a SL6 Emonda rim brake 6.3Kilos, imagine if I had the SLR frame, has me seriously thinking, all could be built for a fraction of the cost of a new bike even building with exotic parts

[@erikrichards6824]

I wish it was a test comparing the Ostro VAM and the O2 VAM.

[@Neilz911]

Time difference is under 1.3% power difference is more than 2% so which bike is more efficient?

[@czts4778]

Nice video and comparison between these two bikes. It would be nice if bikes like tarmac and aethos were compared as aethos is pure lightweight bike.

[@JamesDownes]

I wonder is there a diminishing return the bigger the system weight is. A Small/skinny guy should gain more from a light bike than a big/strong guy. Right? Also, lightweight fast uphill but what about cresting/descending then aero should gain back time

[@bartoszbruhn4577]

So, how much faster will be TOP Spec Propel, still much cheaper then Factor. On SL frameset and Cadex wheels. Propably 500-700g lighter then test one

[@out_spocken]

Same tyres?

[@alandowney5851]

I had a Propel SL0 (team model, ISP, Zipp wheels etc) a couple of years back. It was fast but it just wasn't that nice a bike. At the same time I had a Merlin Extralight. I kept the Merlin much longer and I used it a lot more. I am currently fortunate to have a Storck Aernario with Etap Red and a Vamoots RSL with Super Record 12 mechanical and ENVE 6.4 SES wheels. The Storck is very nice. Much nicer than the Propel was. It gets used. But the Vamoots is nicer still. A lot nicer and it weighs 6.2 KGs with pedals. The titanium rides so well over mixed surface roads and in any case I would pick the lighter more lively and nicer to ride bike every time over something that might save a couple of seconds on a timed route. To extend the analogy, if aero gains are so important to people, why don't they just ride around in skinsuits on disc-wheeled TT bikes all the time?

[@patoberli]

Thanks for your videos, always very interesting. I do have one small wish though, I would appreciate it, if you could somewhat increase the recording volume. You videos are often considerably less loud than others.

[@davidarthur]

Noted. I always assumed YT just levelled out the loudness to all videos are the same but I'll look into it

[@gt5087]

even the tour de france factor sponsored teams didnt use the the VAM, so aero is clearly king.

[@user-dragonball-i4y]

Propel replace with CADEX 50 ultra wheel, Cadex aero wheel 😂🎉 You might feel much much better than SLR1 wheel

[@richard84]

How is the lightweight bike faster if the output with the Aero was 5 Watts lower? Also average power was different on the climb… this is nowhere comparable.

[@davidarthur]

The lightweight bike is also aerodynamic as pointed out and the average power on the climb was close enough to be relevant - remember this is a real world test not a laboratory test

[@TheMerckxProject]

Of course the heavier bike had a 'deadened' road feel. Because you're moving more weight. Personally, I strongly dislike and disagree with an isolated test like this. And while I recognize the difficulty and time it would take, I think *only* riding to power doesn't tell the whole story. You need to also ride to a set speed, and then just ride with no visible data whatsoever. I would be curious if you get consistent results across all three tests.

[@stevocanuck]

Does the factor come w a power meter? For dura ace?

[@bartversteijnen1084]

You should have tested with same tires on both bikes because Rolling resistance of different tires makes a huuuge difference. Had you done that you would see the Aero bike results improving vs the lightweight bike

[@runl6117]

You should definetily change the wheels of the giant. The standard factory giant wheels are kinda crap compared to a decent wheelset. The wheels are where giant makes the biggest cuts in the cost of their bikes

[@ddniUK]

They really addressed this with the 2023 SLR1 wheelset on that new propel.

[@Dreamweaver94]

0:07 It's actually about which bike looks the coolest, obviously 😌

[@stevekurian7131]

Jonas V choose the lightweight R5 over the S5 in the TDF Alpe mountains where he put in biggest time gaps on his rivals.

[@CycoWarriorx]

Good question… aero or lightweight… the “aerodynamics” of an aero make it super appealing but slugging it out on a climb, it’s the complete opposite… the only thing that’s discouraging about a lightweight bike is the rider weight and the potential for riding a “wet noodle”… that said, I’d opt for the aero cause losing weight isn’t as easy as it sounds… 😂🍻

[@outdoortherapy6596]

Would like to see the comparison on a comparably priced bike. Understand thats not what was available. Looking forward to seeing the Giant v's Trek, maybe you can also do the Factor with them.

[@leewinter28]

What jersey are you wearing in this video?

[@Martinik10]

12:55 the light bike has obviously longer reach distance than the "aero" bike (least 4-5cm) and light bike saddle handlebar position definitely more aggressive than the "aero" bike. Even though on flat section aero bike is faster than "light bike with 4-5cm longer stem " and with 5watt less power))) There is huge reach distance with 2 bike and 5watt is big difference.

[@davidarthur]

There was 1mm difference in the reach of the two bikes, but you're right, the Giant is more aggressive, the stack is 3mm lower ;)

[@jakebelford2049]

Hey David could you do something like this in 2025 with the new TCR your getting ?

[@Velodictorian]

Lightweight bike took 10.59 w/h to complete the course whereas the aero bike took 10.23 w/h. So the aero bike is more efficient and over a longer distance will pay dividends

[@jempanuncialman9361]

And also the geometry of the frame..look the angle of the chain stay. So different.

[@nicholasclarke5180]

Thanks for another interesting video, David. I realise this isn't the Propel model in the comparison, but (other things being equal) would your personal preference be for a lightweight bike that's also pretty aero (e.g. the Factor O2 VAM) or an aero bike that's also pretty light (e.g. the new Giant Propel Advanced SL 0)? I have a similar spec Giant TCR and Canyon Aeroad, with the TCR being a bit lighter but the Aeroad being much more aero (as you'd expect). I haven't compared them back-to-back on the same (rolling) route, so I can't say for sure which is faster, but I can say that the TCR does seem to have a nimble and lively ride quality that the Aeroad lacks.

[@davidarthur]

You should try riding both on the same loop, just ride at the same effort, and see which is faster. Would be interesting to see your results

[@95s10nj]

I own a 19 canyon ultimate and just sold my 22 TCR advanced pro to upgrade to the Propel SL0. The new propel is very nimble and light. Size medium is 15.5 pounds with computer mount, pedals and cages. My TCR was 16.2 pounds. It's for sure faster than my tcr on flat and rolling terrain and what surprised me the most was setting a few prs on 10%+ climbs over the weekend.

[@e3dave744]

Riding a light weight bike feels great, even if your a heavier rider .

[@pawesieczkowski106]

Great, the circle has finally been closed. Lightweight bikes -> noo, we need more aero -> Heavy aero bikes -> noo, weight is more important -> ... 10 years of forcing people to buy new/different bikes. And here we go again.

[@ulyssepinon9177]

Wow, companies are so mean for trying to make money. If only you could make your own choices ...

[@andrewpitts2894]

The time on this don't add up Propel 45 sec faster on the flat and then 13 sec slower on the climb which adds up to 37 sec quicker over all but you said the overall result the propel is 16 sec slow?

[@davidarthur]

I only highlighted two sections there were other parts of the course i didn’t zoom into for more timed differences

[@andrewpitts2894]

@@davidarthur There is a difference of 54 secs then was the other part of the course a really steep climb then because if it were a flat section or decent the aero bike would be quicker? and not really fare using a bike that is nearly double the prices also the total time of the two sections for the factor equal the factors overall time. strange that.

[@8rk]

LOL... To beginners who are watching this video: Please ignore all of this and buy what you like the look of. When I started riding 8 years ago it was ALL about lightweight and stiffness. Then about 3-4 years ago lightweight did not matter not even a little bit. It was all about aero bikes. Now it's all about lightweight again. It's a 3-4 year cycle designed to sell you a new bike. Get one. Ride it. Never look back.

[@davidarthur]

So aero bikes came about in 2011 and have been popular for about 12 years or so, and the push over the last few years is for making a bike that is both lightweight and aero, not one or the other but the ideal one bike

[@WhatTheFlipOfficial]

Non equal wheelset and tires = worthless comparison. 2023 and we still doing bike comparisons without at least the same tires lol.

[@docfink]

I think wheels matter most and as you said about switching them, I think your times would be closer.

[@vladimirmikusik4786]

If you try do any time comparison, then please start with set bikes on same tires. On speed about 30 km/h(20 mph) rolling resistance advantage of some tires can overweight small aerodynamics benefit of bike.

[@jaredstrauss617]

I want to see the factor with some mid-deep aero wheels

[@ericmagee9054]

Th real takeaway from these tests should be that one test tells you nothing. They should be done multiple times then you should run statistical analysis on the tests to see if there are any significant differences. Obviously not feasible for most testers but still, the limitation should be clear for all.

[@db613]

That looks like an amazing website for data geeks like me😅 can't wait to check it out 🤤

[@devinmorrison7131]

It's nice to see that the lightweight bike wins in both terms of overall speed and tangible road feeling. Lightweight bikes are always more enjoyable to ride then aero bikes, now imagine if it was rim brake and 5.3kg!

[@n22pdf]

Love rim brakes 😊 Pete

[@DerekGreen123]

I recently went back for a quick ride on my older bike with 105 R7000 Rim Brakes (having spent most of the last 1-2 years riding Shimano Ultegra Disc Brakes). The braking capabilities were perfectly acceptable, but I couldn't believe how bad it 'felt' in comparison. Hydraulic Disc brakes feel wonderful to me, with so much granular power and a lovely feeling of control, vs the Rim brakes that were so 'dead' feeling by comparison. When I'm riding fast over rolling terrain, that brake 'feeling' matters to me just as much as you say the 'road feeling' of lightweight vs aero does 🤷 Each to their own when it comes to bikes, but it really surprised me how much I missed my hydro disc brakes!

[@Dee-Ell]

Tour de France 2023 Stage 16 Individual Time Trial says 'hello'.

[@andyahtside5]

I think it’d be good to end each video for bikes for saying “who this bike is for”. If you live somewhere flat, for sure aero. I live somewhere where I can’t find a flat section longer than a quarter mile. Especially for specific bike reviews (Emonda, O2V, etc.) you do, it’d be helpful to end the video with who would best benefit from that specific bike (pure racer, occasional racer in a hilly/flat area, etc.)

[@richcrompton6891]

Do the calculations alter if you had a big unit like me powering them? The overall system weight would be closer, percentage wise. Would aero make more difference over weight then? That is besides the point though, I’d have swapped those wheels and given it another go on both bikes!😂

[@djwink9]

Doesn't matter to the majority of riders that aren't racing. 1-5 mins. on a long ride....pff. Which is more enjoyable & fast feeling in various scenarios?

[@timowen5772]

David - super vid! But EVERY test like this assumes one rides alone. What is the power data for each bike riding second wheel especially on that first section? Does that aero bike save watts? Or does slipstream completely negate any aero effect?

[@tonyg3091]

Both of them are immaterial to the Average Joe Cyclist. 40 seconds gain over 40km at 50 km/h is exactly as meaningless as 6.3 vs 7.9 kilos. Both of them fall into “nice to have” rather than “absolutely must have” category. Only a bicycle is absolutely must have, preferably road bike, everything else is details. Remember this-no matter how aero or lightweight your bike is, Tadej Pogacar will always beat you on a kid’s bike with them training wheels.😂

[@morningbenders100]

Unless you’re a pro then none of these bikes are necessary. If you have 12k to spend on a bike then good for you. Ride what you can afford and have fun doing it.

[@emo_angel888]

O2 vs Swork Tarmac ?

[@enigma1000]

Aethos vs Factor?

[@TheGazavman]

Put climbing wheels on the aero bike and you have the best combo

[@Alivenus88]

The lightweight bikes are really aerodynamic nowadays so that's why i prefer lightweight bikes myself. The slimmer look is also nicer to me. I also live in a hilly area so lightweight bike was a no brainer for me. BUT if I were to ride on flat roads mostly, then it would have been a hard choice. Because I still prefer the slimmer look of a lw bike. I think performance wise both are excellent options, so you can't really go wrong with either. You can always modify your bike, change to a different wheelset etc.

[@AgingBoy]

The price of the factor is just absurd.. am sure the new SL8 won’t be far away from it and yet so many people buys them. Most of them don’t have the fitness to match the bikes’ potential

[@Nicky458itl]

if both bike same aero the propel should not faster on flat? if weight is very less important than aero even on climb like them force us to belive why the vam blow the propel in the dust? on climb rim brake will blow disc brake in the dust at the same price too. even the vam double the price it still slower than propel on flat. you can get the same weight as the vam by half the price with rim brake.

[@Vismux69]

canyon Ultimate CFR Di2 6.3kg too for half price

[@kubagornowicz]

My bike is less aero and more weight :)

[@MarkusFolkesson]

Improved aero dosen't made the bike more fragile. Aero improve most on one of the hardest parts of the ride - with head wind. Plus: if I want to reduce weight it is a better idea for me as a person to reduce the weight of me a few kilograms. So I go for aero.

[@alex9046]

on my 2some ride today: 33kph @186 watts on canyon aeroad, my mate 193 watts sitting on my wheel 80% of the time on Giant TCR over 4 hours ( ͡• ͜ʖ ͡• ) aero is king, keep your elbows in guys

[@sustainf]

Would have been better to use a 2016 Cannondale SuperSix Evo Hi-mod instead for this comparison. It’s very light but not aero.

[@haithamelmaleh1138]

Nice video

[@davidarthur]

Thanks