Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: Got the new 100/45 stem [sentania] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
so a Dura Ace 7800 crankset should fit the Trek BB? Didn't Trek adopt its own proprietary bb?
Quote Reply
Re: Got the new 100/45 stem [tranzformer] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Yes, but there are bearing kits for all of the major bottom bracket types.


My SC has an Ultegra crankset - so if I had *your* SRM, I could just pop it in and roll.


Team RACC | scottbowe.com

"no matt...your FTP is never high enough, there is always room for improvement." - jonnyo
Quote Reply
Re: Got the new 100/45 stem [sentania] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I'm actually plotting a graph of PS versus PR and collecting data points. And I'm starting to see that clusters of data points get similar frame size recommendations.

Maybe a step further is that someone at Trek could shade areas of that graph to tell people what frame size and what stem option they should get. Certainly that is assuming the PS and PR are the only 2 deciding variables.

What do you guys think?
Quote Reply
Re: Got the new 100/45 stem [nick2u] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I guess what are you trying to accomplish that Trek's sizing chart doesn't already?


Team RACC | scottbowe.com

"no matt...your FTP is never high enough, there is always room for improvement." - jonnyo
Quote Reply
Re: Got the new 100/45 stem [sentania] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Yes! (I'm trying to defend my answer without sounding stupid)

But I think a pure graph (X and Y) coordinates will allow people to visualize it clearer? Like a huge graph with shaded circles for each frame and stem option?

Since you're here, I'd like to ask! Saddle height 735mm, PS 660mm and PR 469mm, which frame size and stem option should I go to?
Last edited by: nick2u: Jul 23, 10 21:54
Quote Reply
Re: Got the new 100/45 stem [nick2u] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Some of it depends on what you feel is visually pleasing + what how much flexibility you want in your position adjustments.

I went for a small and am awaiting the arrival of a 100/45 stem. My current #'s on the SC are meaning less because I'm pretty jammed in the front end; although once I get the longer stem I'll be ~500 reach + ~595-610 stack @ the pads. And between 725 and 740 cm saddle height depending on where you want to measure (closer to 725 @ where I sit, but closer to 740 following the seattube). FWIW - I came from a 56cm Cervelo Dual. My choice was driven by long term options of getting a more agressive fit, and the fact that I find a lot of seatpost exposed visually pleasing.

Looking at your numbers I'd say the only way a small would work for you is with the 110/75 stem. The nice thing about the small (and is why I made the choice to go that route) - is that you could drop to the 100/45 stem (and eventually the 100/10) and get lower while maintaining the same reach. You could do a medium and pretty much use any of the 45/75 stems, but you give up some long term options. Carl has a bit more perspective/grasp of the implications, but given your fit numbers a Medium may be best and it would still give you ample opportunity to get lower given your starting point.

That's my input, but I'd wait for Carl to respond before purchasing ;)

*The one thing I do feel is missing on their sizing chart is adjustment range of the aerobar extensions - it's the major thing that I'm "unhappy" with and why I'm eagerly awating the 100/45 stem, the other being basebar reach. I could live with the basebar reach of the 60/45, but even at max length the aerobar extensions are just too damn short - especially since I flipped the seatpost the other day - which did help other aspects of the fit that didn't feel right.


Team RACC | scottbowe.com

"no matt...your FTP is never high enough, there is always room for improvement." - jonnyo
Quote Reply
Re: Got the new 100/45 stem [sentania] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Just thought this might be useful, I have compiled my own advice Carl and JudgeNick gave me together with the advice they have given to others previously in this thread:



The graph shows PS plotted against PR, with the corresponding data above the graph with stem recommendations. The upper blue line shows the boundary between M and L, while the lower S and M. This divides the graph into 3 portions, S(lowest), M(middle) and L(top most).

As we traverse through each "band" or "portion", going diagonally up gives a "tall and narrow" fit while diagonally down gives a "long and low" fit.

It is also perhaps helpful to say that the Trek sizing chart has for each of its 5 sizes, 6 stem options and thus 6 rectangles (I know I'm repeating what has been discussed before):

50/10: Narrow and low
100/10: Long and low
60/45: Narrow and medium
100/45: Long and medium
80/75: Narrow and tall
110/75: Long and tall

But when you know your PS and you draw a horizontal line through the chart at your PS, you find out how many spacers you need at each stem option! I just realized this! (Yes, I am that slow!) The more space you have under your drawn line at that stem option indicates more spacers needed, and vice versa. This will be perhaps useful for noobs like myself :)

Anyone care to see if my thought process is right on track, or entirely wrong? This fit diagram assumes that PS and PR are the only 2 deciding variables in your fit and frame selection.

The question mark represents my PS and PR, am I right to say I'm a frame size M then?
Quote Reply
Re: Got the new 100/45 stem [nick2u] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
PS of 630 and PR of 500-510 I'd go for large and in reality that comes up quite small!
Quote Reply
Re: Official Speed Concept Owners Thread [Carl] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Wow! Trying to sort through 508 posts re: the Speed Concept. A little overwhelming to say the least. There must be an easier method. So if I ride a size medium TTX now, how do I figure out what size SC I need. My LBS would have to order it and coming from a small town, they won't stock any. Any advice here?



Team Endurance Nation
Quote Reply
Re: Official Speed Concept Owners Thread [QuintanaRooster] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
It all depends on your fit coordinates.


Team RACC | scottbowe.com

"no matt...your FTP is never high enough, there is always room for improvement." - jonnyo
Quote Reply
Re: Official Speed Concept Owners Thread [sentania] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Carl
I placed an order for a P1 SC 9.9 XL two days after it was announced. My lbs said delivery by the 15th of July which has come and gone. Trek has no idea when it will be finished. Given so many others have taken delivery of theirs already, what's holding mine up?

Thanks
Quote Reply
Re: Official Speed Concept Owners Thread [QuintanaRooster] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Sentania nailed it. Medium TTX drivers tend to be evenly split between medium and large SCs since the medium TTX was the odd man out geometrically. Pad coordinates will go a long way towards narrowing it down for you.

Carl Matson
Quote Reply
Re: Official Speed Concept Owners Thread [Carl] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Looks like I'll be flipping a coin between M and L :)



Team Endurance Nation
Quote Reply
Re: Official Speed Concept Owners Thread [Carl] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Not really aimed at you Carl, but you'll probably be pleased to know I can now post on this thread as an actual owner, not just an owner in waiting. For those who missed my rant a couple of weeks back, I had a number of delays with my Project 1 bike and this week saw a further delay which would have put it out of reach for Norseman a week on Saturday. But Trek UK and my local(ish) bike turned it around and got me a stock bike :o)

Green would have been my last choice of paint scheme but it is a stunning bike regardless and I'd choose speed over colour any day. Talking of speed, first ride and I did a route which I regularly do several times a week and includes a "sporting" 10 mile time trial course in the middle. Over what is certainly not a fast 10 mile course (I'd expect it to be better, relatively, on a fast course), I was 80 seconds faster on a fairly windy day than I've ever managed AND very importantly I felt fresher afterwards.

It's not a 100% fair comparison. I didn't have a bottle on the bike and the wheels+tires are at least a little better than my regular training pair. But I did have my usual parachute saddle bag attached, it wasn't the clearest run I've ever had, the wind was definately higher than average and it was only my first ride. So I'm sure there is more to come.

Now it's time to get my Di2 goodies on there.
Quote Reply
Re: Official Speed Concept Owners Thread [QuintanaRooster] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I'm with you brother. I can do either frame size but just can't decide!

Owner of a few Speed Concepts since 2011.
Quote Reply
Re: Official Speed Concept Owners Thread [ttx_tri] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I take delivery of my P1 Speed Concept 9.9 on Sunday. Can't wait.
Quote Reply
Re: Official Speed Concept Owners Thread [SafariX] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Yes I got my Speed Concept 9.9 yesterday.

I have a couple of questions for you other SC owners.

How do you mount the computer, without ruining the aerodynamic what is your solution?

What about hydration will a Speed Fill ruin the effect of the kammtail?

@Carl did you test any bottle mounts on the bike in the wind tunnel?
Quote Reply
Re: Official Speed Concept Owners Thread [RFDK] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I have my powertap CPU (wireless) on the right aerobar extension.

Hydration - I just run two plain bottles. May do something a bit more "nice" for the next race.


Team RACC | scottbowe.com

"no matt...your FTP is never high enough, there is always room for improvement." - jonnyo
Quote Reply
Re: Official Speed Concept Owners Thread [SafariX] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I picked up my project 1 Speed Concept 9.9 w/ DA on Sunday. I have it paired with the new Easton EC90 TT wheels.

This bike is amazing. The integration and engineering is phenomenal. Just need to dial in my position.
Quote Reply
Re: Official Speed Concept Owners Thread [RFDK] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The runs we did on round vs Bontrager Speedbottle in a couple of positions happened very early on in the frame shape development, so there's no relevant data we have based on an all-up production rig. However, based - in part - on that work (and other considerations) we put the ST cage mounts as low as we could on the frame. Generally speaking, the less the bottle & cage deviate from the width of the tube, and the more they "complete the [foil] profile", the better. Hence the shape & placement of the draftbox, the P4's bottle, etc.

As for effects on the Kamm tail benefits, we've not done any targeted testing along those lines either, but Rappstar's thoughts related to the draftbox certainly provide something to think about.

Carl Matson
Quote Reply
Re: Official Speed Concept Owners Thread [Carl] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I just got a Speed Concept for my wife and started setting it up for her TT position today. She nedds it to be UCI legal for an peak event in a little over two weeks.

The bike did not ship with the standard steerer stub because Trek is running low on stock. One is now on the way, however, so I will be able to put UCI legal bars on the bike.

However, I was surprised when I realized that the Speed Concept seatpost does not meet the UCI 3:1 rule. It is 20mm wide and over 70mm deep. After a little digging I found a picture of Levi's bike at the tour. He appears to have used a TTX post in his SC with some sort of a shim at the back to fill in the area taken up by the Kamm tail on the standard SC post. Here is the link:

http://velonews.competitor.com/...achment/levi_treks19

Has anyone else run into or commented on this problem?

I sure hope that Trek can provide me with one of those shims or some other way to make the seatpost UCI legal.

--rvh
Quote Reply
Post deleted by motobob [ In reply to ]
Re: Official Speed Concept Owners Thread [motobob] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I have had nothing but problems with my Trek... I tried to start a post about the latest one today and then one of the admins deleted it. Best of luck. In my opinion I have learned my lesson about being an early adopter. Unless you are a VIP (Ie. Lance or Chris) it is just better to wait for them to sort out production problems. This is honestly just good advice about early adoption - hopefully this reply doesn't get deleted. Don't get me wrong I love the product, but if I were to do it all over again I would wait for the next model year. If the retailer would let me return it I would tomorrow. This is no different than Apple and their latest iPhone blunders including the biggest problem that gets no press which is the fact that the proximity sensor doesn't work and you are constantly muting/ending/conferencing your phone calls. My honest advice for you would be take it to the local Trek dealer and show them the problem - see what they can do.

Visit The Chipotle Calorie Calculator
Quote Reply
Re: Official Speed Concept Owners Thread [motobob] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Try Aquanet. Ghetto solution, but it provides the stiction that paste does not.


__________________________________________________
Powered by: Hat Tip - the power of thanks
http://hattip.com http://locations.hattip.com
Quote Reply
Re: Official Speed Concept Owners Thread [rvh] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The shim which allowed The Shack to ride with a TTX post is permanently bonded into the frame. It is currently a team-only item, and we do have a legal post in the works...though not in the timeframe you require.

One way you might achieve UCI compliance with the stock post is by attaching additional material to the sides of the exposed post in a manner similar to that used by teams in the immediate aftermath of the 3:1 clarification memo.

Carl Matson
Quote Reply

Prev Next