Rule 33 isn’t bunk after all

[jrenaut]

New wind-tunnel tests find surprising gains in cycling efficiency from leg-shaving.

As I don’t race (and because shaving my legs would probably require a belt sander), I don’t shave my legs. But I’ve always been curious how much difference it actually makes. Seems like a lot of other things would give you a much bigger boost with much less stubble. But if it’s really 7%, that’s significant.

Topic

[n18]

My guess is that no leg hair means air flows closer, smoother, and faster around the skin and that means it cools the legs better, which translates to more speed. Think of laying on your back on a windy day on a tall grassy area, would you feel the cool breeze better without grass?

[hozn]

@n18 94175 wrote:

My guess is that no leg hair means air flows closer, smoother, and faster around the skin and that means it cools the legs better, which translates to more speed. Think of laying on your back on a windy day on a tall grassy area, would you feel the cool breeze better without grass?

I don’t think the (Specialized) windtunnel test was actually measuring the riders’ power output; they just had the riders pedaling to simulate the movement of cycling so it was a realistic test of wind effects. (I’m surmising, without having read any more about the study than what was said in the video.) — So I don’t think the cooler legs would matter here.

[Author]

Replies