Does shaving your legs while cycling (not swimming) make you go faster? Does shaving your legs the night before a race slow you down?

Aeordynamic drag increases exponentially with speed, so the only time smooth legs could have a considerable impact would be in a competitive time trial situation were a few seconds (or less) would mean the difference between a podium spot or none. The rest of the time the difference is probably miniscule. For an average rider the advatage is likely negligible. Your position on the bike has much more influence on your aerodynamics than smooth legs.

Bicycle racers shave their legs because they know sooner or later they are going to crash. Shaved legs are less likely to get infected and secondary you don't have hairs sticking out that can grab the pavement. Shaved legs heal faster with fewer complications.

An additional related question: Is it possible that shaving your legs has an effect on the rate that your legs are cooled when riding?

Bicycle racers on top rated teams get a lot of massage work done on their legs. It's easier and less messy without hair.

swimmers shave their legs too, does it help them?

The points posted by jcbless and sunfisher both make sense to me. as to pandab0i's question...yes, it helps a swimmer, more than a cyclist, because water has a lot more drag than air.

I have read opinions all over the web, but have there been any scientific studies (such as, say, the MYTHBUSTERS) done on the amount of reduced drag on a set of shaved legs?

quote:

Originally posted by Geotech:
For an average rider the advatage is likely negligible...

Yeah, but if it helps his Mother sleep well at night, he should just keep telling her that it's for cycling.

I vote with subductionzone, additionally supporating scabs on hairy legs look gross, especially on women.

The current paradigm for competitive road racers is the "skinsuit". They even wear little slippery "booties" over the regular cycling shoes.
Over a lengthy time trial of 30 km or more, such heroics might cut a few tenths.

That might be the margin of victory.

quote:

I have read opinions all over the web, but have there been any scientific studies (such as, say, the MYTHBUSTERS) done on the amount of reduced drag on a set of shaved legs?

quote:

Over a lengthy time trial of 30 km or more, such heroics might cut a few tenths.

That might be the margin of victory.

both of you are assuming that the difference between shaven and unshaven is measurable... there are a thousand differences in any race that will skew the results on the order of whole seconds. among them : how much sleep the rider got yesterday, concentration, body differences, slipstream off the cycle in front, diet, etc, etc. you cannot do a scientific study to measure such small differences with such large variables... except perhaps using a wind tunnel, which would tell us what we already know. that the hairs on your leg produce less drag than eating a pop-tart right before a race(in terms of resistance to forward motion.)

and the skin suit is for weight, flexibility first. science second.

a compeditor adresses every aspect and tries to do what he can to maximise his chances. We KNOW there are a thousand factors that affect winning and losing. All of those factors have to be adressed by the compeditor. We are discussing this ONE factor, and its effect. You have an opinion that a wind tunnel will be useable for a test.... then lets test it and see if you are right or this is a myth that needs Busted.

I will point out that professional cycling is one of the most science-involved of sports, and a fantastic amount of research has been done to maximize rider potential.
Most all teams do extensive wind-tunnel testing to determine the maximum aerodynamic efficiency of the rider, his position, and his equipment.

If you watch the time trials in Le Tour, you will notice that not all the riders run the full "aero" gear.
That's because only a small percentage of the field will expect to place highly in the time trials.
Most of the riders are specialists; sprinters, "domestiques", climbers, etc. Only the top time-trial men, perhaps 10-12 out of the full field of nearly 200 riders, will expect to win a time-trial.
These are the guys you'll see with the full gear; skin-suit, booties, time-trial bike, etc.

The reason railroad rails are at their currantdistance apart is that railroad car wheels are at that distance. Wheels are at that distance because they were origionally made by carrage makers, who used the same measuring tools they used to make a horse drawn carrage. Carrages were made with that precise distance between wheels because the wheels had to fit the ruts in the road. The ruts in the road were that width because they were origionally made during the Roman occupation times, and that was the width between Celtic chariot wheels. Celtic chariot wheels were that far apart because that was the width of two horses rear ends.. So... the next time a train derails neer my home, I can rightfully saw "If the Celts would have fatter horses, none of this would have happened." I can see a sport that started in the 1800's more interested in finding the right pharmitisutical mixture (back then they did use coccane and anphediminies) to not run a scientific study on shaved legs. One guy shaved his legs, and everybody else bought razors. Just saying there has been lots of tests done doesn't mean anything. I want to see data. Humans are notorious for doing stuff "because that is the way things have always been done," or because someone else is doing it that way. Could we please look at some hard DATA? That is why I like Mythbusters in the first place; they do not accept these myths that "EVERYBODY KNOWS" at face value, they put them to the test. Lets have a bunch of Lance Armstrong wantabees come on the show and run some tests, before shaving and after shaving. Just seeing Torie's face when Grant says this is the next myth they will test will be worth it. I want to see some data.

According to Wikipedia:
Men who do a lot of biking and who have hairy legs find that leg hair can chafe or rub on their trunks or biking shorts creating abrasions. In addition, in competitive cycling, smooth skin has less drag than does hairy skin.

Additionally, but of probably more importance than the above, because:

* Shaved skin is easier to clean and dress after suffering 'road rash' (abrasions caused by a crash or fall)
* Shaved skin is both easier (for the masseur) and more comfortable (for the cyclist) to massage

Lastly, shaved legs look good!

Only the last 2 points are true IMHO. If the "road rash" issue was true, why don't cyclists shave all over? Oddly enough, cyclists generally don't shave the hairy areas underneath their cycling shorts, so chafing as a reason is also a myth.

Riding with a time trial specific helmet or an hydration pack on your back, makes much more aero sense than shaving, but it does not look as cool (or as good) as shaved legs - that's why cyclists generally do not do this.

Only for pro-cyclists that get massages all the time, does it make sense to shave your legs as a male cyclist. All the others are posers that shave "TO LOOK GOOD".