To make the rear airfoil capable of holding tools, etc...would have not been as aero as Dr. Speed mentioned in the launch video.

The fork:

i would like to get a better look. The previously mentioned idea that the fork wings may help prep the air for the knees is an interesting one. If it did, the low yaw data with a rider might be impressive, even if the low yaw riderless data was medeocre.

What's "competitive" mean exactly? And >15deg isn't a viable design point.

Hello

first post on Slowtwich for me. Sorry for the english, I'm french...

1 minute of aero gain over an Ironman : based on my beloved calculator, carefully calibrated through hours of ride on the track and road, 1mn over 180km around pro speed (40 km/h) equal : 2,1 w
i.e. 1,2 watt for me (around 33km/h)
i.e. 21 g of drag at 30mph (to compare to several studies like "Tri bikes at the age of peak aero", ...)
i.e. I will get twice or three time this saving replacing my good old ultregra pulley wheels with a nice 16 or 17 teeth OSPW from Cycling Ceramic or Ceramic Speed or whoever,,, just for comparing.

Please note this is nearly the margin error in an aero test.

Please note also we do not know which yaw repartition for this result (to my (lack of) knowledge)

Remark 1 : how can a big brand with big R&D can arrive to such a small result, reworking completely the bike ?
My view is that it is coming from the negative impact of disk brakes on aero.
Disk brake have such shitty aero that reworking the rest of the bike with radical new solution barely compensate ?
I'm curious to see the results of future Cervelo P5 (or P3) Rim vs Disk aero drag, based on various yaw. It will give us some real comparison figures.

Remark 2 : disk brakes is a clear trend (forced, but real), so brands need (want) to go there. For aero bikes, such as Tri bikes, it is still to be proven it is a good point for users. And this point appear to be difficult to prove. This bike is an exemple. Releasing a new 10/14k€/USD bike with no aero gain (thanks to margin error) based on unknown (but certainly oriented) yaw, is certainly not what Specialized expected...
Their previous bike already not an aero rocket... this one possibly worse (with not favorable yaw) ?
These products managers are not in a good situation...

Remark 3 : I love disk brakes, when going downhill for hundreds or thousands of meters of D- in Pyrenees or Alps... Much safer, much stronger. Especially with rain. But probably in a flat tri it will bring me nothing. Except drag ?
I'm ready to go disk, for safety reasons in downhill, under rain, but given the price to change one road and one TT/Tri bike (one with basic/training wheel, the other with 55mm aero wheels, frequently swapped depending on usage), I guess I will wait 1, 2 or 3 years in order to let the offer stabilize, then go to mid price models (such as P3 Disk, S3 Disk, or Trek, Spe, Canyon, Argon... equivalent).
Probably no or little aero gain (compared to my existing P3 2014), but safer.

No doubt early adopters and less price-sensitive peoples will go sooner for these disk equipped babies. Aero gains are ... ahem.... not guaranteed ?

Is there any serious manufacturer nowadays, who still tests bikes without a rider onboard?

I will give them some time, but what is most notable with the new ia, and to a lesser degree shiv, is actually the lack of marketig aero data. To me that says a lot.

The marketing departments will work with whatever numbers they can get their sticky hands on. Any good marketer worth his/her salt will find the situation that puts a bike in the best light, rider or not, weighted yaw angles or not.

I will give them some time, but what is most notable with the new ia, and to a lesser degree shiv, is actually the lack of marketig aero data. To me that says a lot.

Attempting to refill that on the fly is going to induce a lot of crash replacements frames.

The marketing departments will work with whatever numbers they can get their sticky hands on. Any good marketer worth his/her salt will find the situation that puts a bike in the best light, rider or not, weighted yaw angles or not.

I will give them some time, but what is most notable with the new ia, and to a lesser degree shiv, is actually the lack of marketig aero data. To me that says a lot.

Does it really matter anymore? Peak aero is here and that’s ok! Integration and braking is the new focus instead of this crazy requirement that every bike be significantly faster than the old one. It just won’t happen anymore.

Let the OCD about drag data go and embrace integration and features.

Does it really matter anymore? Peak aero is here and that’s ok! Integration and braking is the new focus instead of this crazy requirement that every bike be significantly faster than the old one. It just won’t happen anymore.

Let the OCD about drag data go and embrace integration and features.

I think you need to go read the Slowtwitch wind tunnel study

https://www.slowtwitch.com/Tech/Triathlon_Bikes_in_the_Age_of_Peak_Aero_6429.html

cowboy7 wrote:

great first post

and better grammar than most of us English speakers !

One of my favourites is Mallorca 70.3 where I took minutes out of folks on flashy top end TT bikes because my basic TT bike had better braking and because of that I had more confidence.

I'd bet that almost all of that was just you being more skilled, though. If the only differentiating factor was disc brakes you'd be taking seconds, not minutes.