Previous test: "leg-shaving reduced drag by 0.6 per cent"
New test: "The tests showed that shaving his legs reduced Thomas’s drag by about 7 per cent"
Yet the blurb says: ''Even more confounding was that the results contradicted earlier finding''. What's contradictory about those results? Be it 0.6% or 7%, shaving your legs clearly reduces drag.
I believe that was a reference to the "insignificant difference" claims. 0.6% wasn't seen as significant enough difference so it became a "fashion choice" rather than an efficiency one.
I find it odd that they only report the results in percent in the first place. Maybe the baseline drag of a rider back in the 80's was much higher than today, making 0.6% old the same amount of force as 7% new.
New test: "The tests showed that shaving his legs reduced Thomas’s drag by about 7 per cent"
Yet the blurb says: ''Even more confounding was that the results contradicted earlier finding''. What's contradictory about those results? Be it 0.6% or 7%, shaving your legs clearly reduces drag.