Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Dimond has some A2 data!
Quote | Reply
http://rustersports.com/blog/

https://rustersports.com/...on-Savings-Watts.pdf

http://rustersports.com/product/aero-beam-box/







The pictures are hard to see because they are so small but they claim 5W for their aero box to fill in the gap between the aerobars and frame.







Powered by All Out MultiSport - http://www.aomultisport.com/
Last edited by: BryanD: Aug 1, 16 8:45
Quote Reply
Re: Dimond has some A2 data! [BryanD] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote Reply
Re: Dimond has some A2 data! [BryanD] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
That's great but 150$ for a piece of plastic which should have come with the bike anyway?

Also looks like you have to re-cable your bike to install it?

Maurice

http://www.multisportsolutions.com
Quote Reply
Re: Dimond has some A2 data! [mauricemaher] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Yes, I test rode this bike at IM Wisconsin last year. The bike felt great but honestly, I felt like I was test riding a car without a hood. Looked very unfinished and they agreed. They told me they were working on a solution which is what this appears to be. It should be included with the bike.
Quote Reply
Re: Dimond has some A2 data! [BryanD] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
This is so embarrassing.

So now we are supposed to believe that, prior to them finding another 40 grams of drag savings, this bike was faster than anything else on the market. There should be a slowtwitch support group called "lies that jordan rapp told me"
Quote Reply
Re: Dimond has some A2 data! [romulusmagnus] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
romulusmagnus wrote:
This is so embarrassing.

So now we are supposed to believe that, prior to them finding another 40 grams of drag savings, this bike was faster than anything else on the market. There should be a slowtwitch support group called "lies that jordan rapp told me"

x2. Couldn't have said it any better myself.
Quote Reply
Re: Dimond has some A2 data! [mauricemaher] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
mauricemaher wrote:
That's great but 150$ for a piece of plastic which should have come with the bike anyway?

Also looks like you have to re-cable your bike to install it?

Maurice


That's 5W at 30mph.....so 1.5W at 20mph (a more typical IM speed).

Looks like you could cut a slot to avoid recabling (then just tape over the slot).

Given that it's non-structural, could have just molded it with cheap plastic or 3D printed.

Personally I'd love to see someone put a 3D print file out there that anyone could use.

The Shiv has a similar plastic "box" that comes in several sizes with the frame so you can adjust depending on your spacer stack.



__________________________________________________
Powered by: Hat Tip - the power of thanks
http://hattip.com http://locations.hattip.com
Last edited by: Titanflexr: Jul 29, 16 16:29
Quote Reply
Re: Dimond has some A2 data! [Titanflexr] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
You're completely missing the point. The speed they calibrated to is an industry stand to quantify deltas in product on a consistent basis, even as that measure (grams of drag) is itself incredibly stupid and inaccurate for real world application

But for instance, the difference between the DA and IA is about 50 grams of drag (from memory?). The industry quoted difference between the P5 and SC is similar

So before they added this critical component to find such a massive discernible difference in drag, we are supposed to buy that this completely impractical, offensively expensive bicycle was already very fast (I.e. According to Rapp, faster than the shiv). Bullshit, bullshit, bullshit

Also, the bike looked like shit without this piece of hardware (if you weren't running that specific p5 front end, which is itself ridiculous because it's UCI legal...why Cervelo and 3T combined can't do better than some asshat in Highlands Ranch Colorado is beyond me)

This bike is shit
Quote Reply
Re: Dimond has some A2 data! [romulusmagnus] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
romulusmagnus wrote:
You're completely missing the point. The speed they calibrated to is an industry stand to quantify deltas in product on a consistent basis, even as that measure (grams of drag) is itself incredibly stupid and inaccurate for real world application

Yes, 30mph is a standard (a reasonable speed for TdF FOP TTers like Fabian and Tony). I was just pointing out what the watts savings is likely to be for a "typical" Diamond owner who's considering cost/benefit.

My pref. is reporting time saved over 40K....since that at least scales up a bit for slower riders. CdA is ideal....but not really usable for the non-engineers.


__________________________________________________
Powered by: Hat Tip - the power of thanks
http://hattip.com http://locations.hattip.com
Quote Reply
Re: Dimond has some A2 data! [Titanflexr] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Titanflexr wrote:
romulusmagnus wrote:
You're completely missing the point. The speed they calibrated to is an industry stand to quantify deltas in product on a consistent basis, even as that measure (grams of drag) is itself incredibly stupid and inaccurate for real world application

Yes, 30mph is a standard (a reasonable speed for TdF FOP TTers like Fabian and Tony). I was just pointing out what the watts savings is likely to be for a "typical" Diamond owner who's considering cost/benefit.

My pref. is reporting time saved over 40K....since that at least scales up a bit for slower riders. CdA is ideal....but not really usable for the non-engineers.

Cost/benefit analysis behind buying a part that absolutely completely should be included in this absurd bicycle? There's no empirical analysis to be mace...you bought the wrong product to begin with. You're already $6k+ into this awful frame, might as well bring it up to par with the Ventum One. Don't even get me started on the Super Fork.

The only people I know who are happy with their Dimond purchase are dentists.
Quote Reply
Re: Dimond has some A2 data! [romulusmagnus] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Just curious, why so much hate for Dimond and Ventum? Don't give me a troll answer, give me an honest opinion.

Powered by All Out MultiSport - http://www.aomultisport.com/
Last edited by: BryanD: Jul 29, 16 18:33
Quote Reply
Re: Dimond has some A2 data! [BryanD] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
My antipathy isn't limited to those bikes. I went on a hate filled rampage about the Giant trinity advanced just yesterday. I'm equal opportunity like that
Quote Reply
Re: Dimond has some A2 data! [romulusmagnus] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
That doesn't answer my question.

Powered by All Out MultiSport - http://www.aomultisport.com/
Quote Reply
Re: Dimond has some A2 data! [BryanD] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
wow, they have the balls to charge 150 dollars for a 3d printed spacer?!? its like 5-6 dollars of high quality filament, and 4-5 hours of print time...
Quote Reply
Re: Dimond has some A2 data! [BryanD] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The Dimond is one of the most impractical bikes on the market. You can't ride it on a modern trainer. You have to cut the seat post to size, which limits your flexibility to change the fit, to lend it to a friend in a time of need, or to ever sell it. Only 2 bottles for training? Not practical. The head tube/steerer junction looks ridiculous, and the expensive super fork doesn't solve the aesthetic issues without this new piece.

The Ventum One: well, the whole front end. At least Dimond figured out the front brake...Ventum didn't even get that far. Complete China carbon trash.

They are both SO expensive. I mean, way way more than a Speed Concept expensive.

Both companies have incredible aero data -- I say that literally. Ventum continues to go to a shit wind tunnel and refuse to release data; Dimond's release here stinks to high heaven...oh great, fantastic news, now it's much much faster than a P5-3!

Given all this, why would anyone buy one? Well, dentists need to show off their uniqueness. That's about the only reason I can think of. If you have that kind of money to spend on being unique, why not just custom paint a P5?

I saw this classifieds ad the other day for a Dimond. The guy said he not only bought the bike because of Jordan Rapp, he also bought the same size (dude was 6'3") and couldn't get the bike to fit. Perfect Dimond / Ventum customer: complete idiot sheep.
Quote Reply
Re: Dimond has some A2 data! [BryanD] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I forgot to mention my suspicion that lots of people are buying these bikes because it is trendy to have these bikes...which is just such an embarrassing thing. For being such insufferable egotists, most triathletes have little capacity for independent thought when it comes to their consumerism. Roka Aviators OMFG I want to be like Jesse please take my money!
Quote Reply
Re: Dimond has some A2 data! [romulusmagnus] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
romulusmagnus wrote:
The Dimond is one of the most impractical bikes on the market. You can't ride it on a modern trainer. You have to cut the seat post to size, which limits your flexibility to change the fit, to lend it to a friend in a time of need, or to ever sell it. Only 2 bottles for training? Not practical. The head tube/steerer junction looks ridiculous, and the expensive super fork doesn't solve the aesthetic issues without this new piece.

The Ventum One: well, the whole front end. At least Dimond figured out the front brake...Ventum didn't even get that far. Complete China carbon trash.

They are both SO expensive. I mean, way way more than a Speed Concept expensive.

Both companies have incredible aero data -- I say that literally. Ventum continues to go to a shit wind tunnel and refuse to release data; Dimond's release here stinks to high heaven...oh great, fantastic news, now it's much much faster than a P5-3!

Given all this, why would anyone buy one? Well, dentists need to show off their uniqueness. That's about the only reason I can think of. If you have that kind of money to spend on being unique, why not just custom paint a P5?

I saw this classifieds ad the other day for a Dimond. The guy said he not only bought the bike because of Jordan Rapp, he also bought the same size (dude was 6'3") and couldn't get the bike to fit. Perfect Dimond / Ventum customer: complete idiot sheep.

That guy ^ is me. I'm glad you know so much about me based on my bike purchasing habits.

You must have misunderstood as I said got the Medium based on Jordan Rapp's fit as he and I have identical body sizes and I wanted to see if I could adapt to a more aggressive position. I didn't buy the Dimond because of him. I bought it because I liked the way it looked, the ease of maintenance/and travel, and that it is made in the USA. I didn't need it as I already had a great bike that led me to a KQ last year but I wanted try something new. This bike is faster based on both subjective and objective measures but ultimately the sizing wasn't sustainable for me for IM distance. I'm sorry this caused you so much concern and anguish.

I'll head back out to pasture with the rest of the sheep now....
Quote Reply
Re: Dimond has some A2 data! [romulusmagnus] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
romulusmagnus wrote:
The Dimond is one of the most impractical bikes on the market. You can't ride it on a modern trainer. You have to cut the seat post to size, which limits your flexibility to change the fit, to lend it to a friend in a time of need, or to ever sell it. Only 2 bottles for training? Not practical. The head tube/steerer junction looks ridiculous, and the expensive super fork doesn't solve the aesthetic issues without this new piece.

The Ventum One: well, the whole front end. At least Dimond figured out the front brake...Ventum didn't even get that far. Complete China carbon trash.

They are both SO expensive. I mean, way way more than a Speed Concept expensive.

Both companies have incredible aero data -- I say that literally. Ventum continues to go to a shit wind tunnel and refuse to release data; Dimond's release here stinks to high heaven...oh great, fantastic news, now it's much much faster than a P5-3!

Given all this, why would anyone buy one? Well, dentists need to show off their uniqueness. That's about the only reason I can think of. If you have that kind of money to spend on being unique, why not just custom paint a P5?

I saw this classifieds ad the other day for a Dimond. The guy said he not only bought the bike because of Jordan Rapp, he also bought the same size (dude was 6'3") and couldn't get the bike to fit. Perfect Dimond / Ventum customer: complete idiot sheep.


First, the Dimond is impractical in the sense that you can't use it on a trainer. I won't buy a bike I can't use on my Kickr. The Ventum can be used on any trainer. You can also change out the aerobars on the Ventum to anything you want.

Next, small companies have to charge more to recoup research and development costs. They don't have the large capital that Trek, Specialized, Cervelo, and Felt have. I bet when these companies first started their bikes were expensive as well. Costs are high at first but they will come down over time. Most companies start with high end and work their way down to middle and lower end models. Shimano Dura Ace to 105 is a great example of this.

All of the top of the line bikes with similar equipment to the Ventum and Dimond are close in price.

Next, Ventum has sent a bike to Jim@ERO for testing. We are all waiting on the data and analysis from Jim.

People want to stand out. There is nothing wrong with Ventum and Dimond bikes. People don't want to always have what everyone else has.

The next generation of tri bikes are going to be even more expensive.

Powered by All Out MultiSport - http://www.aomultisport.com/
Last edited by: BryanD: Jul 30, 16 9:06
Quote Reply
Re: Dimond has some A2 data! [romulusmagnus] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
romulusmagnus wrote:
The Dimond is one of the most impractical bikes on the market. You can't ride it on a modern trainer. You have to cut the seat post to size, which limits your flexibility to change the fit, to lend it to a friend in a time of need, or to ever sell it. Only 2 bottles for training? Not practical. The head tube/steerer junction looks ridiculous, and the expensive super fork doesn't solve the aesthetic issues without this new piece.

The Ventum One: well, the whole front end. At least Dimond figured out the front brake...Ventum didn't even get that far. Complete China carbon trash.

They are both SO expensive. I mean, way way more than a Speed Concept expensive.

Both companies have incredible aero data -- I say that literally. Ventum continues to go to a shit wind tunnel and refuse to release data; Dimond's release here stinks to high heaven...oh great, fantastic news, now it's much much faster than a P5-3!

Given all this, why would anyone buy one? Well, dentists need to show off their uniqueness. That's about the only reason I can think of. If you have that kind of money to spend on being unique, why not just custom paint a P5?

I saw this classifieds ad the other day for a Dimond. The guy said he not only bought the bike because of Jordan Rapp, he also bought the same size (dude was 6'3") and couldn't get the bike to fit. Perfect Dimond / Ventum customer: complete idiot sheep.


romulusmagnus wrote:
I forgot to mention my suspicion that lots of people are buying these bikes because it is trendy to have these bikes...which is just such an embarrassing thing. For being such insufferable egotists, most triathletes have little capacity for independent thought when it comes to their consumerism. Roka Aviators OMFG I want to be like Jesse please take my money!


I've always liked the look of the Dimond but two things turned me off... the original fork was just hideous looking and didn't match the bike and the space behind the steerer tube. The solved both of those issues for me with the Super Fork and this Beam Box widget. I like to buy a new bike every three years or so and my recent history was a 2009 Felt B2, 2011 Trek Speed Concept, 2014 Trek Speed Concept (bought in 2013), and most recently a 2016 Dimond. I just wanted one so I got one.

To address some of your points and how they pertain to me:

1. The trainer issue. I never ride my tri bike on a trainer. I can ride in the aero position for 99% of an Ironman but can't ride for 10 minutes in aero on a trainer so I scrapped riding a tri bike in favor of a roadie on my trainer many years ago.

2. Seat post. I didn't have to cut mine.

3. Two bottles for training. I agree this is far less than ideal but there are ways around it. A double bottle holder behind the seat option would give you four bottles (with BTA and down tube options). I'm only training for 70.3's for the foreseeable future so not much of a concern for me at this point.

4. Yes, it's expensive but it's my money.

5. Aero data. Dimond has been doing a lot of testing in the A2 tunnel the past few months. I'm interested to see what gets released. I actually saw this data about the Beam Box several weeks ago but I don't think it was for public consumption at that point. Obviously, this data was released to sell the Beam Box. Nothing more, nothing less. Dimond has done a bunch of other testing far beyond this widget though. My understanding is there's some good data coming but I guess we will wait and see. I hope they just release everything (or most everything) and let us dissect it up. I just hope they don't do what Ventum did and say we have this awesome data and never release it. At least Dimond went to A2 and not Faster.

6. I bought one because it is different from other bikes. Bikes are my one guilty pleasure in life. It's also a very comfortable riding bike. I have it setup fit wise almost identical to my Trek SC, and it does ride smoother than the Trek. I'm not sure people are buying them because they're trendy... wouldn't that be why everyone and their grandmother has a P5 or SC or Shiv. Dimond is a boutique bike, and comes with a boutique price. All and all, there are not a lot of Dimonds out there. I live in the Houston metro area and I know of four of us that have them.

7. Height is certainly only one piece of the puzzle when it comes to fit but all things being equal I don't see how someone 6'3" tall as Jordan or the other guy can fit on a Size M Dimond. I would think that frame is too small for someone that tall but with the many different bar and stem configs it's probably a workable solution. Jordan seems to make it work. The other guy couldn't. I'm 6' and I ride the M size and it fits me perfectly. I knew it would fit me great going in since the size L Trek SC and size M Dimond have identical geometry.

2017 Races:
Texas 70.3 April 2nd | Canada 70.3 July 30th | Augusta 70.3 September 24th | New Orleans 70.3 October 22nd | Cartagena 70.3 December 3rd
Last edited by: The GMAN: Jul 30, 16 9:05
Quote Reply
Re: Dimond has some A2 data! [The GMAN] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The GMAN wrote:
5. Aero data. Dimond has been doing a lot of testing in the A2 tunnel the past few months. I'm interested to see what gets released. I actually saw this data about the Beam Box several weeks ago but I don't think it was for public consumption at that point. Obviously, this data was released to sell the Beam Box. Nothing more, nothing less. Dimond has done a bunch of other testing far beyond this widget though. My understanding is there's some good data coming but I guess we will wait and see. I hope they just release everything (or most everything) and let us dissect it up. I just hope they don't do what Ventum did and say we have this awesome data and never release it. At least Dimond went to A2 and not Faster.

Dimond's wind tunnel data on their website comes from Faster.

Powered by All Out MultiSport - http://www.aomultisport.com/
Quote Reply
Re: Dimond has some A2 data! [BryanD] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
BryanD wrote:
The GMAN wrote:

5. Aero data. Dimond has been doing a lot of testing in the A2 tunnel the past few months. I'm interested to see what gets released. I actually saw this data about the Beam Box several weeks ago but I don't think it was for public consumption at that point. Obviously, this data was released to sell the Beam Box. Nothing more, nothing less. Dimond has done a bunch of other testing far beyond this widget though. My understanding is there's some good data coming but I guess we will wait and see. I hope they just release everything (or most everything) and let us dissect it up. I just hope they don't do what Ventum did and say we have this awesome data and never release it. At least Dimond went to A2 and not Faster.


Dimond's wind tunnel data on their website comes from Faster.

I think he was referring to subsequent testing. TJ lives in Tucson part of the time for training and with Ironman Arizona it was just easy to go to Faster. Not being totally happy with the experience and data may have driven them to A2.


Save: 7% on Air Relax Recovery Boots| $100 on Normatec + Now Only $1395| 15% at Trisports.com | 15% on The Most Absorbable Magnesium | 15% on Base

Blogs: Best Cheap Aero Sunglasses | My Pre-Season Blood Test Labs | Best Cheap Indoor Training Stand | My Wind Tunnel Numbers | 2x20 Wattage Progression | Wind Tunnel Testing My Bike Shoes
Quote Reply
Re: Dimond has some A2 data! [BryanD] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
BryanD wrote:


Next, small companies have to charge more to recoup research and development costs. They don't have the large capital that Trek, Specialized, Cervelo, and Felt have. I bet when these companies first started their bikes were expensive as well. Costs are high at first but they will come down over time. Most companies start with high end and work their way down to middle and lower end models. Shimano Dura Ace to 105 is a great example of this.

I would be curious to see exactly how much R&D Trek/Cervelo/Specialized is spending versus Dimond/Ventum. Now, the one thing Dimond has is crazy-ass, obsessive triathlete, who rides bikes professionally and wins Ironmans on less watts / kg then pretty much anyone I know, who is also heading up the company and playing an active role in the design, development, and refinement of the bike. That is worth a lot in my book.

With that being said, I have said the before, how does anyone expect a bike to perform when a company spends $100,000 on R&D versus $10,000,000 compare. Sure the smaller startups should be more nimble and have better efficiency outside of scale, but when it comes down to it, do you want a bike that maybe has $100,000 into it or $10,000,000? No idea on the number, but I know the R&D spent is not even close and is likely easily 100x at least.


Save: 7% on Air Relax Recovery Boots| $100 on Normatec + Now Only $1395| 15% at Trisports.com | 15% on The Most Absorbable Magnesium | 15% on Base

Blogs: Best Cheap Aero Sunglasses | My Pre-Season Blood Test Labs | Best Cheap Indoor Training Stand | My Wind Tunnel Numbers | 2x20 Wattage Progression | Wind Tunnel Testing My Bike Shoes
Quote Reply
Re: Dimond has some A2 data! [BryanD] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
BryanD wrote:
The GMAN wrote:

5. Aero data. Dimond has been doing a lot of testing in the A2 tunnel the past few months. I'm interested to see what gets released. I actually saw this data about the Beam Box several weeks ago but I don't think it was for public consumption at that point. Obviously, this data was released to sell the Beam Box. Nothing more, nothing less. Dimond has done a bunch of other testing far beyond this widget though. My understanding is there's some good data coming but I guess we will wait and see. I hope they just release everything (or most everything) and let us dissect it up. I just hope they don't do what Ventum did and say we have this awesome data and never release it. At least Dimond went to A2 and not Faster.


Dimond's wind tunnel data on their website comes from Faster.


That data is two years old. The new data is coming from A2. They have been testing in A2 since early this year. There's a secret Dimond Facebook page that teases us from time to time with testing pics from A2.

As I said before, I'm interested in what gets released.

2017 Races:
Texas 70.3 April 2nd | Canada 70.3 July 30th | Augusta 70.3 September 24th | New Orleans 70.3 October 22nd | Cartagena 70.3 December 3rd
Last edited by: The GMAN: Jul 30, 16 10:24
Quote Reply
Re: Dimond has some A2 data! [romulusmagnus] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
romulusmagnus wrote:
You're completely missing the point. The speed they calibrated to is an industry stand to quantify deltas in product on a consistent basis, even as that measure (grams of drag) is itself incredibly stupid and inaccurate for real world application

But for instance, the difference between the DA and IA is about 50 grams of drag (from memory?). The industry quoted difference between the P5 and SC is similar

So before they added this critical component to find such a massive discernible difference in drag, we are supposed to buy that this completely impractical, offensively expensive bicycle was already very fast (I.e. According to Rapp, faster than the shiv). Bullshit, bullshit, bullshit

Also, the bike looked like shit without this piece of hardware (if you weren't running that specific p5 front end, which is itself ridiculous because it's UCI legal...why Cervelo and 3T combined can't do better than some asshat in Highlands Ranch Colorado is beyond me)

This bike is shit


Wow. I had no idea I had generated such rage in someone. I've got probably roughly 8,000mi on a Dimond. I do a lot of the same workouts. On a lot of the same roads. Based on what I've seen, the Dimond is faster than the Shiv. That's with the same wheels, sometimes the same tires and sometimes not, same tubes, different bottle configuration (BTA + downtube vs BTA + behind the seat, which is certainly a noticeable difference), same saddle bag, different brakes (Magura vs Tektro), virtually identical position, same helmet, sometimes different clothing but sometimes same, different shoes, and of course the huge variance of weather. Is it a LOT faster? No. I'd say that I see pretty much what the data TJ got from FASTER showed - they are close. For a different rider, with a different setup, might they see something different? Of course. But for me, I believe the Dimond is faster.

As far as the 25g of savings from the aerobox? I don't know about that one way or the other. With rider or without? With what bars? How many spacers? Etc, etc, etc. Do I think it's faster? Almost certainly. 25g faster? Who knows. Do I agree that it was probably something they should have included in the design from the outset. Yes. Absolutely.

The new fork is demonstrably faster on the Dimond than the old one. At least at low yaw - which due to the nature of the topography where I train is typical. TJ said it stalls more quickly, which is not a surprise. How that will play out in various races, I do not know.

I had my first chance to get into the tunnel on the Dimond with Zipp at ARC. Unfortunately, comparing different tunnels is generally a bad idea, so I'd be reticent to compare CdA numbers on the Shiv at Specialized to CdA numbers from the Dimond at ARC. Further, the data from ARC seem bad anyway as there was tire rub on the platform due to - IMO - the ARC roller system being not the most ideal. But we didn't catch that until later in the day. So basically all the morning runs were way high for a number of athletes. The data was so off that it's basically garbage. Unfortunately.

There are a lot of great bikes out there. I do not believe that the Dimond is dramatically faster than any of the very good ones - P5 or Trek SC or Scott Plasma 5 or Specialized Shiv or... Nor do I believe it is measurably slower. Or, more specifically, that the variance between bikes largely will come down to fit, bars, other equipment (bottle placement), etc. And that ultimately it's likely nearly impossible to determine the "best" bike for you without significant time and expense. So just pick one of the very good ones and be happy.

Does the Dimond have flaws? Yes. And, in my experience, so does every other bike. The Shiv has flaws. The SC has flaws, based on not only what I've seen but discussions with athletes who ride it. Etc. Etc. Etc. At any given moment, I'd say the "fastest" bike is likely the one that came out most recently. The new Canyon certainly seems like it might hold the title, though at the requirement of an electronic groupset. Though it's hard to know how much is the fact that it's under Jan Frodeno...

Anyway, if you feel there needs to be a support group for people I've lied to, feel free to start one. I'm happy to chime in to try to clarify where I can. Or simply to let people bash me. In the meantime, I'd simply say this:



"Non est ad astra mollis e terris via." - Seneca | rappstar.com | Facebook - Rappstar Racing | @rappstar

Ask me about: DiamondBack Bikes | Zipp | 1st Endurance | Normatec - $100 off RAPP2017 | Quarq | SRAM | MatchRider | ROKA
Quote Reply
Re: Dimond has some A2 data! [romulusmagnus] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
My experience with the Dimond bikes was pretty disappointing. I test rode one from a local dealer and was shocked at how harsh the ride was compared to my 2016 P2, especially considering that the selling point of a beam point seems to be the added comfort. This was with the stock Profile deep dish wheels, so perhaps those wheels are harsh as compared to the 808s on my P2, but my bike felt like a magic carpet ride next to the Dimond.

Still, on a whim, I bought a used Dimond bike sans wheels from someone on the forum here last Spring. It was a killer deal with a Di2 build, Quarq power meter, ceramic speed bearings, etc..., and I figured I could use my 808s to smooth out the ride. The bike arrived and the fit and finish was so poor that it looked like the very first attempt someone had at building a bicycle, or anything for that matter, in their life. The paint was flaking and chipping to the touch and there were cracks all along the bottom bracket that were impossible to discern whether they were structural or not. The bike was still under warranty to the original owner but Dimond was basically worthless in addressing my concerns. According to the seller, Dimond said they would take care of me if the cracks turned out to be structural, but I never got anything in writing. Plus, the offer was worthless in that they evidently said they would give me a tiny discount on the full retail price of a $4,000 Xpress frame if mine failed. In other words, they refused to warranty their workmanship on the frame, knowing full well that the paint was problematic on a ton of their frames. I even offered to pay them to repaint it properly and they told me they were too busy. I asked them how much to upgrade to a Superfork and they told me those were only available to 'customers', i.e. not me because I didn't buy the bike new from them. So much for standing by your product.

It was so apparent to me that this company was not headed in the right direction that I sold it immediately and am happily riding my heavily upgraded P2, at a fraction of the cost.

Finally, does no one else seem to care that the Dimond wind tunnel testing showed no measurable improvement over a Shiv or a P5-three with the rider onboard? That fact alone tells me that there is no real reason to buy a Dimond other than to look cool. You aren't going to be faster on it, hell, you may even be slower than a P5-Six, you can't ride it on a trainer, the resale value is terrible, and the company doesn't appear to stand behind their work.
Quote Reply

Prev Next