What’s “fairly aero”? I mean is it actually aerodynamic? or just mean’t to look the part?
second is how far up the priorities list is aero vs comfort, weight or general handling?
My own current plastic road bike is probably more “Profiled” I’d say, it’s intended to at least look more Aerodynamic but compared with the aluminium frame it replaced I can’t help noticing the Head tube and downtube are probably about 50% bigger in section, the top tube has a fluted variable section, it’s main profile is ~60% shallower in height but maybe ~30% wider, the seat stays and seat tube are probably no different so I reckon it probably presents more marginally more frontal area but with more blended joints, and TBH I don’t think I’m much faster on it, Aero benefits from body position will far out weigh some inexpertly NACA aerofoil derived tube profiles I reckon, most importantly it’s lighter and more comfortable so easier to ride distances and up hills IMO, a totally Aero frame might not give me that…
The point about older skinny steel frames is a good one actually, in simple terms those thinner tube profiles were probably marginally “more aero” than a lot of modern composite road bikes, hence we now get aero/semi-aero road bike frame designs intended to get back to about the same aerodynamic performance that a steel frame would have managed in the 1960s… Discuss…