Hi All,
Didn't really know which section to post this but if I am asking this sort of question then 'Begiiners' seemed appropriate. I am 64 and have problems with my neck, not serious but if I get into the "tuck" position for longish periods it can give me a bit of gyp. Hence I tend to cycle in a more upright position. Clearly this is not aerodynamically efficient. Given the winds of late I have been in the the tuck position more than normal. Clearly there is less wind resistance but I get the impression that this position is less tiring on the legs, ie more efficient use of whatever muscle power each individual has. This seems to be borne out when going uphill. Have there been any studies, where wind is not a factor, to determine whether the tuck position is more efficient than any other? Or is it simply less wind resistance, less effort? Thanks
Didn't really know which section to post this but if I am asking this sort of question then 'Begiiners' seemed appropriate. I am 64 and have problems with my neck, not serious but if I get into the "tuck" position for longish periods it can give me a bit of gyp. Hence I tend to cycle in a more upright position. Clearly this is not aerodynamically efficient. Given the winds of late I have been in the the tuck position more than normal. Clearly there is less wind resistance but I get the impression that this position is less tiring on the legs, ie more efficient use of whatever muscle power each individual has. This seems to be borne out when going uphill. Have there been any studies, where wind is not a factor, to determine whether the tuck position is more efficient than any other? Or is it simply less wind resistance, less effort? Thanks