Mudguards- do they make a difference

[bonj2]

Go back to #4 Magnatom.

About 4 Watts.

The research has been done, but only for my own interest.

You'll lose about 1/2 mph with 'guards fitted if 15 mph is your normal speed.

Most cyclists aren't particulary bothered about how much speed is lost. In fact, they don't give a flying f**k. All they want is to stop the shitty, oily AND SALTY road water splashing up their feet, chest, back, face etc; as well as their BB, rear stays, brake mounts and gear mechs.

I notice how you've invented yet more liquids to splash off the road and yet more parts of the body and bike that are affected by not having mudguards.
Gear mechs? how can the rear mech possibly be protected by mudguards from water which is splashing up off the tyres - the mudguard can never possibly be between the tyre and the mech.

 

[jimboalee]

I notice how you've invented yet more liquids to splash off the road and yet more parts of the body and bike that are affected by not having mudguards.
Gear mechs? how can the rear mech possibly be protected by mudguards from water which is splashing up off the tyres - the mudguard can never possibly be between the tyre and the mech.

It depends how long the splash flap is on the front 'guard. Mine comes right down to 1/8" off the tarmac.
You should know how spray off the front tyre gets to places you'd not thought of.

The rear mech is in direct firing line for spray of the front tyre,,,,

 

[Jonathan M]

LOL!


However, no-one has really answered my question, i.e. how much of a performance reduction does having mudguards on produce?

Can it be a constant though? Surely must be worse with a headwind, or with a bigger gap between tyre & mudguard, or with wider mudguards? I think someone has already posted the problem is likely to at its greatest with a MTB with wide MTB guards and a skinny MTB slick.

Besides (and Bonj will probably have his say about this ) isn't what performance reduction will mudguards have, but what performance increase will a rider experience when they ride a mud-guardless bike after a winter of winter-bike riding?

 

[Jonathan M]

Gear mechs? how can the rear mech possibly be protected by mudguards from water which is splashing up off the tyres - the mudguard can never possibly be between the tyre and the mech.

Got to agree with Bonj on this, don't see that guards can really offer any protection to the main parts of the drivetrain. I use them for my own comfort and the comfort of other riders.

 

[jimboalee]

I notice how you've invented yet more liquids to splash off the road and yet more parts of the body and bike that are affected by not having mudguards.
Gear mechs? how can the rear mech possibly be protected by mudguards from water which is splashing up off the tyres - the mudguard can never possibly be between the tyre and the mech.

If I can dig them out, I'll photo the Land Rover specifactions for 'Contaminated Water Ingress' testing.
There are several concoctions of 'Road water' solutions, including Anti freeze, Hydraulic oil, Brake fluid, Engine oil, sand, pulverised windscreen glass, Rocksalt and even Animal faeces from a variety of farm species.

The various mixtures / solutions are sprayed at either individual parts or the whole vehicle.

I haven't invented 'more liquids'. Land Rover did that 50 years ago.

 

[jimboalee]

This forum turned boring for a week or so, but has perked up now.

"Come on you fenderfloppers".

 

[Davidc]

LOL!

However, no-one has really answered my question, i.e. how much of a performance reduction does having mudguards on produce?

I think that's because no one has any objective proof.

Short of wind tunnel testing its difficult to quantify the air resistance. Because the air flow around bike wheels is likely to be chaotic (turbulent) the nice simplified calculations from A level physics (when it included calculus) won't work. There has to be an increase, but is it significant or noticeable? Who knows?

As I mentioned earlier I used to take mine off when I did TT in the 70s, but that was really for weight. I took everything off which didn't actually stop the bike from going or stopping.

I suspect that they slow Bonj and his supporters down a lot, but that's psychological - all that hate really saps performance. On the other hand they make those of us who prefer to have them go faster, with the thought of how much better the bike looks with mudguards fitted, and how much drier we'll stay when it starts raining again.

 

[Davidc]

Got to agree with Bonj on this, don't see that guards can really offer any protection to the main parts of the drivetrain. I use them for my own comfort and the comfort of other riders.

I have to agree about the rear mech, but a full set of guards helps keep the front mech clean, and also the brake mechanisms.

 

[gavintc]

I will fit mine when my arse starts to get cold from the spray. But, a club ride with 20 mudguardless riders is an interesting experience. We were out a couple of weeks ago, and were caught in a downpour, staying close and slightly offset reduced the hosepipe effect. It was actually quite a laugh.

 

[bonj2]

It has to be said that I dont' think they do slow you down, but I don't think they offer any tangible advantage worth having either. I am putting them back on my scott hopefully this weekend, but I actually *admit* that it is purely for looks - I think they make my scott look better, but they make my fixie look worse - so my fixie doesn't have them whether it's rainy or not, and my scott does have them whether it's rainy or not.

 

[HJ]

LOL!

I had a feeling the thread might go this way!

However, no-one has really answered my question, i.e. how much of a performance reduction does having mudguards on produce?

Imaging taking part in a 100 mile sportive. For someone who would average 16mph over the course without mudguards, what would that same cyclist average with good fitting, reasonably light mudguards on?

I'm sure there is no definitive answer, i.e. no-one has ever done the research. I'm just curious to what people views of this are. It just amazes me that even when the weather is poor, most will chose not to have mudguards on.

Lets get real about this, probably not enough to make any real difference. The main objection to mudguards is on aesthetic ground, especially by people who think that by not having mudguards on their bike it will make them look like a real racing cyclist. For the Pros, where a 1/10 of second at the end of a stage can be the difference between winning and loosing the yj, there might be a case for not having mudguards. Take them off if you are fantasist or if you manage to out sprint Lance Armstrong last week...

 

[Fab Foodie]

It has to be said that I dont' think they do slow you down, but I don't think they offer any tangible advantage worth having either. I am putting them back on my scott hopefully this weekend, but I actually *admit* that it is purely for looks - I think they make my scott look better, but they make my fixie look worse - so my fixie doesn't have them whether it's rainy or not, and my scott does have them whether it's rainy or not.

... with that, the Serious Cyclist dissappeared in a puff of his own logic...

 

[jimboalee]

Go back to #4 Magnatom.

About 4 Watts.

The research has been done, but only for my own interest.

You'll lose about 1/2 mph with 'guards fitted if 15 mph is your normal speed.

JIMBO CALLING EARTH....

This info is from 'Rolldown' tests. They are very simple and I have explained them before on this forum.
There is no need for a wind tunnel, just a lengthy hill of known gradient, a calm day and a computer that records MAX mph.

You need to know tyre Crr, the Total vehicle weight and all the workings ( which are in the Bosch Automotive Handbook ).

 

[Jonathan M]

... with that, the Serious Cyclist dissappeared in a puff of his own logic...

Or is it a puff of his own fashion consciousness?

 

[gabriel959]

Has anyone seen the new Crud road mudguards? They seem to offer an excellent solution to the "looks" subject. They barely weigh anything too!