BS on the Tesla/Pace-Clock advantage over other Marathons

Nike must be on your paychecks.

I call BS too. It's looks like the clock is close in a few photos but when you get an alternative angle you can clearly see there is no way they got an advantage. They would have had to have been running practically up on the car tail lights to get a drag.

It's obvious that the ones complaining are simply Anti-Nike fans. If Brooks had done this it would be "Wow, look what they are doing to elevate the sport!". Nike had an original idea and they can't handle it.

I used to be a cyclist so I'm pretty experienced with drafting. Trucks often give an incredible draft, sometimes noticeable even from the distance those guys were running (especially garbage trucks for some reason, I don't really know why). I think the car with the clock mounted on it was about as tall as a normal truck, but maybe not quite as wide

However, I noticed during the broadcast that Kipchoge was rarely directly behind the car. For instance, on left turns the car would often drive so that its left wheel was to the right of the dashed line, but Kipchoge would be hugging the line more closely. So it wasn't clear to me how much of a draft he was actually getting -- I remember it bothering me when I watched it because I wanted him to get more behind it, especially on the straightaways. Maybe there was a bit of a crosswind, I dunno.

So I agree the idea of running behind a massive moving wall sounds kind of dumb, but I don't quite think it's actually what was happening.

Busted wrote:

Nike must be on your paychecks.

Funny, the track alone is 1s per km quicker than Berlin, the v pacers for 100% of the race took maybe another minute off. That's 2:02 low in all probability without the tesla even being discussed.

Another point: had the billboard-timing clock created a drag reduced vacuum, Kipchoge would have over heated... the body depends on the air resistance for cooling. Even at cool temps, a partial vacuum would drastically reduce sweat evaporation leading to overheating. The marathon time ran by Kilchoge is legit, too legit to quit, hey hey

We're they worried about a wrong turn?

Why a pace car?

With 6 pacers he could always know his time so it had nothing to do with the clock.

Busted wrote:

Nike must be on your paychecks.

Is Brooks on yours?

BS was my first thought when I read the QOD. The benefit of any drafting distance is dependent on speed; the slipstream of the Tesla would be much greater at 20-25 mph than at 13 mph (cycling vs Kipchoge speeds). This should be obvious. Besides, Kipchoge had a wedge of runners directly in front of him -- this was the source of drafting benefit. Not the Tesla.

the distance looks like about one tesla car more in length, 5 meters (16 feet) but even at 10 meters there is most certainly a drag-effect and/or windbreaking

I keep saying, this would be super-easy to test ala mythbusters-style

don't forget the camera car too but that wasn't always there

https://i.imgur.com/pY23FoH.jpg

Mythbusters did a "drafting behind semis" episode a few years ago. Here is their results chart:

http://www.autoblog.com/2007/10/28/mythbusters-drafting-10-feet-behind-a-big-rig-will-improve-mile/

Semi was moving 55 mph. The Tesla was moving 13 mph. Tesla's profile is maybe 1/3rd of the semi's. I would bet good money the effect was negligible on Kipchoge, especially when factoring in the pacers in V-formation.

Keep in mind Kipchoge was not 5 meters behind the Tesla at any point as he was sitting behind the group.

Then why did they mount the clock on a gigantic sail and then ran this ridiculous contraption suspiciously close to the runners.

If there is no slipstream advantage running behind this type of contrivance, can you explain why Nike did it that way?

closing argument wrote:

Then why did they mount the clock on a gigantic sail and then ran this ridiculous contraption suspiciously close to the runners.

If there is no slipstream advantage running behind this type of contrivance, can you explain why Nike did it that way?

The swoosh would have been much smaller on a tiny clock.

closing argument wrote:

Then why did they mount the clock on a gigantic sail and then ran this ridiculous contraption suspiciously close to the runners.

If there is no slipstream advantage running behind this type of contrivance, can you explain why Nike did it that way?

You're really grasping at straws here. Of course cutting wind resistance was a Nike objective, but it wasn't accomplished by the Tesla.

First, it isn't unusual to have a large clock mounted on a pace car. Consider this pace car from the Berlin marathon:

The idea that this is a "ridiculous contraption" should be abandoned.

Second, the car needed to be close to the runners because of the laser line. You can't angle that line too much or it'll get fuzzy. In fact, if Nike really wanted to take full advantage of slip stream, there should have been a lot less angle on the laser. Could've been set half the distance or less than it was.

Finally, assuming Nike did want slipstream advantage, it only would have been good for the front pacers. Maybe they wanted that. But with Kipchoge tucked in the back of the peloton, that slipstream is overwhelmed by the one created by the pacers. Have you ever run in the back of a big group? Your wind resistance is zero, and you don't even need to be tucked behind a semi.

What's missing in your picture are the runners. How close were they to this particular ridiculous contraption? Based on the angle of the photographers presumably trying to shoot lead runners, it seems like they were pretty far behind.

various sources say the pacers were 6 meters behind the tesla

which looks about right, you could park another tesla between them

tesla causes windbreaking AND draft for pacers, pacers cause similar effect for the runners

I mean something significant happened once the other two lost contact with the pacers and tesla, they didn't just fall off, they fell off sharply

anyway, all Nike has to do to stop this conversation in a year when they try this again is to move the tesla forward another 5 meters and the pacers forward another couple meters

then it will look plausible

closing argument wrote:

What's missing in your picture are the runners. How close were they to this particular ridiculous contraption? Based on the angle of the photographers presumably trying to shoot lead runners, it seems like they were pretty far behind.

Irrelevant.

Point is the "contraption" is normal, and any slipstream produced is negligible given the peloton.

jewbacca wrote:

Mythbusters did a "drafting behind semis" episode a few years ago. Here is their results chart:

http://www.autoblog.com/2007/10/28/mythbusters-drafting-10-feet-behind-a-big-rig-will-improve-mile/

Semi was moving 55 mph. The Tesla was moving 13 mph. Tesla's profile is maybe 1/3rd of the semi's. I would bet good money the effect was negligible on Kipchoge, especially when factoring in the pacers in V-formation.

Keep in mind Kipchoge was not 5 meters behind the Tesla at any point as he was sitting behind the group.

Interesting, because in another article it says that drafting in a pelaton in cycling saves 40% of energy needed to cut through still air.

The car was a huge benefit, Elephant in the living room.

jewbacca wrote:

closing argument wrote:

What's missing in your picture are the runners. How close were they to this particular ridiculous contraption? Based on the angle of the photographers presumably trying to shoot lead runners, it seems like they were pretty far behind.

Irrelevant.

Point is the "contraption" is normal, and any slipstream produced is negligible given the peloton.

It is highly relevant. If the Berlin contraption driver had been instructed to stay, say, no less than 20-30 meters ahead of the runners, then the slipstream would definitely be negligible. And based on the angle of the photographers, that's pretty much where the runners actually were.

But there was no reason for the Nike contraption to be so large. The Berlin car had a legitimate reason to advertise Timex for the marathon crowd and the TV audience. Apart from the discreet signage on the side of the Nike clock, their gigantic sail was mostly blank space. Why did they make so large?

closing argument wrote:

jewbacca wrote:

Irrelevant.

Point is the "contraption" is normal, and any slipstream produced is negligible given the peloton.

It is highly relevant. If the Berlin contraption driver had been instructed to stay, say, no less than 20-30 meters ahead of the runners, then the slipstream would definitely be negligible. And based on the angle of the photographers, that's pretty much where the runners actually were.

But there was no reason for the Nike contraption to be so large. The Berlin car had a legitimate reason to advertise Timex for the marathon crowd and the TV audience. Apart from the discreet signage on the side of the Nike clock, their gigantic sail was mostly blank space. Why did they make so large?

Just one question for you:

If you're driving a car and tucked 2m behind Semi #1 that's drafting 2m behind Semi #2, which semi is blocking the wind for you?

Pace car/clock was of negligible aerodynamic assistance here.