Strava isn't the best indication of a TdF rider's capability.
For instance, the Pro record on Alpe d'Huez is around 37 minutes and I personally watched Indurain go up it in around 39 minutes back in 1991 IIRC. Seeing him power by me in what looked like a 39x15 at about 15 mph on a stretch that I struggled to maintain 9 mph the day before was an unfriggen believable sight, the sound of air rushing in and out of his lungs was almost earth shattering. Like a Thoroughbred race horse. It was like blood was dripping from his nostrils. It took me an hour, so, I sucked then as I do now.
The Strava record is 45 minutes with fewer than 1% cracking 50 minutes on this iconic climb. (Zwift times do not count, not real). IIRC....there are about a dozen TdF climbs up it under 40 minutes.
Videos can be deceiving for many reasons. Anyone who thinks those speeds aren't scary, I don't know what to say. I've been there. The road surfaces suck. The shiny is poorly applied tar. No question someone like RoJo would wring the best out of a bent but the limits are due to the roads and not the bike. Just that simple. No need to get into acceleration times and fancy 8th grade Newtonian physics, its the roads.
Maybe the biggest error in the report pertains to CdA assumptions. The report compares a Trek upright to a M5 CHR racer. Froome on an M5 CHR putting down 288 watts isn't "only" going to traveling at 45 km/hr. I am much bigger than he and I do 47 km/hr on 257 watts. He would be closer to 50 km/hr at 288 watts. The road bike guesses are also wildly off especially applying a constant CdA to the entire ride. On descents, they tuck very tight and CdA drops from around 0.300 down to 0.200 or lower. When inside of a peloton, most the riders see almost no wind resistance and in effect have zero CdA. The author is just making wild (and wrong) guesses there.
The second largest mistake is assuming 20% lower power on a bent. Maybe 10% is reasonable and supported by studies.
Third, the climbing speeds or the bent are also way too low.
Fourth, the analysis compares the two platforms as if the race were two independent time trials and that just isn't how mass start races are run.
Fifth, the assumption of 80% FTP to average over 5 hours just is not supported by power files of these racers although in theory (power duration curves), this can be achieved especially when rested but that isn't realistic power levels and energy to waste during a 20+ day tour
Sixth, his claim is a 9Kg weight for an M5 is way off. They are 1-2 Kg heavier.
