This to me stands out. If are you racing a P5 build, you do not ever have round bottles inside the frame. You have a BTA and BTS set up which we all know is the most aero option if you are doing 2 X 700ml bottles. There are also many more options as in just a BTA set up as you can get more than enough fluids on course.

I understand that they wanted to point out that their integrated 1400ml is aero and any other bike doing 1400ml would have to have two bottles mounted in various locations BUT just because you have 1400ml option does not mean you carry 1400ml with you. To be honest their 1400ml option is complete overkill as far as I am concerned.

I guess they have 1400ml because they can.

How about an aftermarket bottle unit where 1/2 is bento/toolspace and 1/2 is for fluid?

Even if we do get data from a proper tunnel with decent protocol, it all means nothing to me until I see how the frame interacts with a rider aboard (a la Dimond).

+1 Totally agree - to be honest, for me, the data (as presented) is disappointing and I had my credit card at the ready. Initally the bike design took a lot of flak as it was deemed ugly by many and while I can appreciate aesthethics as much as the next person, when considering a bike for competition I'm only interested in performance - I'd ride a gate if I thought it would make me faster. I'm not yet convinced that the risk Ventum has taken with a different design approach has paid off...yet...as in it remains to be seen.

While I'm on my soapbox I also want to vent another disappointment - for a $6k+ frame that claims to be the fastest thing around I expect all design aspects have been optimized. It appears to me that the aerobars, extensions and seat post are very generic looking - almost identical to those on a friends $600 hong-fu open mold chinese frame. Now that's not to say there's anything wrong with those generic parts but for 6 grand..sorry, I'd expect more attention to detail.

Agreed. If it was storage for half and fluid for the front half, now that would be cool.

That's actually a pretty good idea. If you were doing a longer distance event just put the full capacity reservoir on and put your flat kit in a bottle behind your saddle.

I'm not doubting this. I'm doubting the reliability and repeatability of the tunnel they used based on past results that the tunnel has produced, especially at yaw.



If their Faster data comes out the same at the A2 data I will be very surprised. But if it does I'll give them and Faster a golf clap.

I may not be an aerodynamics engineer like you are but I do a fair bit of aero testing, consult with some companies on clothing/equipment design based on wind tunnel testing, have helped a few companies design some wind tunnel testing protocols and talk with several people in the bike/tri industry on aerodynaimc testing.

I have also used the A2 tunnel multiple times. I know companies that run the same bike or wheel as the control year after year after year after year and they are getting the same baseline numbers to start year after year after year.

I also know this is something Faster has not been able to do. Heck they've had trouble getting the same numbers between the baseline run and 5 runs later with the control. When they did the Ventum vs P5, there is no guarantee that the tunnel was reading the same for the P5 as it was for the Ventum. Maybe it was maybe it wasn't. That's the beauty of Faster, one doesn't really know.

Since you're a aerodynamic engineer if you test and your baseline shows say 250gm of drag then you test 5 runs and retest baseline and it shows 283gm of drag is that acceptable for a low drag model?

So saying Faster is cheap doesn't miss the point, they are way less expensive than A2, LSWT, TX A&M. It's true they are cheap compared to the industry standards. Maybe they, Ventum, switched to Faster bc for 70min at A2 you can get 2h of testing a Faster. That's a big savings for a company that is producing very little if any revenue. RD isn't cheap, but shabby RD is more expensive.

But surely as an aerodynamics engineer you understand all this which is why I can't understand why you are arguing and what you are arguing about.

---

Brian Stover USAT LII
Accelerate3 Coaching
Insta

But we know that bikes that test faster without a ride most often test faster with a rider as well.

---

Brian Stover USAT LII
Accelerate3 Coaching
Insta

This reminds me of Orbea. They had reputable people helping with their previous version of their aerobike, the Ordu 2nd generation, after Crowie quit their ass bc the original Ordu was a brick ona good day.

These people were aero, aero data, aero more aero data.

Orbea said it aesthetics 1st, 2nd 3rd and maybe then aero. More or less, some of the aero people left, some got asked to leave the project. The aesthetic crowd won and th Ordu 2nd generation was still a step or 3 behind in the aero game. Their 3rd generation Ordu looks like it could be a game changer for them. Will be interesting to see if their embrace of aero can win back some followers. I suspect without a strong dealer network and a f*ck ton of advertising their glory days went out the window with Normann Stadler.

---

Brian Stover USAT LII
Accelerate3 Coaching
Insta

no offense but 1) you could have and still for a short time get the frame for 25% if you signed up for the friends and family and yes it's still available even after the data. 2) everything was optimized, just because they didn't go with a name brand cockpit doesn't mean they didn't optimize it. that would be ridiculous to think they would risk and gamble on something that meant a lot when it comes to how the rider interacts with the bike seeing how they are 5 of the touch points on the bike 3) dude...complaining about framesets at 6k in this day in age is not something you are going to get a tremendous amount of sympathy for...Shiv sworks...$6500 Cervelo P5-6 frameset $7000 Dimond frameset $5950...I could seriously go on about this but you can get it right now for $4500 sooooooo

---

Kirk Noyes

Downtubes are for Dinosaurs

Just because Cervelo and Specialized charge $6k for a frameset doesn't mean some brand new unproven company taking a risk with an innovative design can slap that same price tag on their frame and not expect to get scrutinized. They haven't yet earned it and unfortunately their first big opportunity to justify that $6k price has largely been a fail. I'm not ready to completely buy into Dimond yet but I think they are a step ahead of Ventum at this point in terms of credibility based on their data presentation even though it is also from FASTER. At least it generally agrees with the Felt IA testing that shows drag flatten or begin to increase after 12-15deg yaw. I have no idea how the Ventum testing produced continued drag reductions past 15deg, especially for the P5 that has never demonstrated that characteristic from multiple sets of tests from various different manufacturers.

Why is Ventum not in this thread discussing their product and data?

there really is no "earn your way into" free market dynamics, I do this everyday with an engineering consulting firm. We develop what we are selling which is largely Intellectual property and we build our costs in and then figure out based off of our revenue projections and market drivers we build the price in. Even if we develop a new line, there is no "earn your way in"... so they sell it cheap and when they start selling them and then the next generation bike which may be a paint scheme change and they charge more everyone screams...why did you go up?!??! Dimond based their design off of another already somewhat known design and they are an unproven entity but get a pass because you think their data is a step ahead even though they released theirs from the SAME place? Ventum one is close to the Lotus design but was modified as well and are about in the same boat as Dimond in terms of start ups. As for why they aren't on here answering questions is because right now they are literally all hands on deck working on the weekends to fill orders and make sure that the very large number ( I won't divulge that number even though it was shared with me) that has been ordered already get to the people that purchased them by the promised delivery date. THAT is a very important thing to them. they are aware that there are questions that would like to be answered and have said they will be coming on soon to answer them.

---

Kirk Noyes

Downtubes are for Dinosaurs

This frame is out of the price range of what I am planning on spending for my next bike but if it was in my price range it would be hard to fork over money to a company that is brand new on the scene and no idea of whether or not they will still be around in 5 years if I have a warranty issue. At least with the big guys, chances are fairly good they will still be around. But a new comer? Who knows.

With Dimond you lose all the perceived aero benefit the minute you put someone on the bike. Kind of a big deal.

Interesting. I need to go back and look at the Dimond data again. Was it that bad?

---

Make Inside Out Sports your next online tri shop! http://www.insideoutsports.com/

Yup, the Shiv came out top with a rider. http://www.rustersports.com/...eport-11.14.2013.pdf

You really do protest to much for someone with no skin in the game

Here's a fact. They had 2 sets of data, somehow found the time to release the data from the most unreliable of sources but have neither somehow found the time or the inclination to post what is likely to be the more valuable set due to the quality issues with faster

So long as the getting orders out mantra continues rather than releasing data people will rightly speculate and question why they found time to quote-unquote post some facts and then get called on the facts disappear like shergar

Their case is definitely being helped by you behaving like a shill for them

There's any number of people on here who have, can and will drop 5+ on a frame and more but in the absence of any reliable data, the fact that they set up the alternates with shit hydration solutions and pretend that they're comparing like with like.

It may be time for you to step away from the keyboard and let them speak for themselves and produce some data rather than issue statements like we know its fast because someone won on it. Go look at some of the old school German uber biker set-ups that won kona, don't think anyone would make the case their bikes were fast with shit taped all over them because they won, may have slightly more to do with the engine and they could win on my cross check with cx tires

Additionally, the fact the entire team from Ventum has been MIA since the release of this data doesn't bode well for them either. IMO.

---

"One Line Robert"

I think folks are being way too hard on them. Did Dimond really release anything more meaningful?
Plus, what was everyone expecting?? There isn't exactly much 'low hanging fruit' to be had beyond the current top frame designs.
As someone mentioned in the Dimond thread, you don't buy one of these new 'super' frames expecting to gain much. You buy them to ave something more unique than a Cervelo/Trek, etc, something made in the USA, etc.
Everyone take a pill. If you don't like the way the bike looks, then don't buy it.
Personally I think both the Dimond and the Ventum look pretty cool, and both will be on my shopping list possibilities when I get bored with my speed concept.

bored with your speed concept?! wash your mouth out!! Cancellara just cried a little on the inside

I don't think it's a question of an alternative, the difference here is its been built up as one thing and when called on it, everyone is to busy

I'd be curious to know whether a p3, Tririg alpha front end and omega X brakes compared to some superbikes is within the tunnels margin of error. The point being that we're discussing margins which are 4/5ths of f££k all in the greater scheme of things. The fundamental difference is that with a P3/5 I can be reasonably confident that in 2-3 years I can deal with someone should I have an issue

Interesting

I wonder why the Dimond tested worse with a rider? Does a seat tube help clean up the air in that area which made the Shiv test faster?

---

Make Inside Out Sports your next online tri shop! http://www.insideoutsports.com/

First, I'd just like to point out that I give Dimond props for their protocol. Head on the forearms isn't a realistic position but at least it is repeatable so their heart is in the right place. That said, I don't know we can say the Shiv was faster (even though they do contrary to their own interests) simply because, IMO, they didn't have enough runs.

That said, I think there's value to having "some junk in the trunk" when it comes to a bike. Look at the Speed Concept with the draft box. Trek is pretty clear that you're faster with the draft box on (I think they quote 30seconds/40k?), others here have tested it to be faster, and I've field tested it myself to be faster. I'm not confident enough in my data to quote how much faster but the difference for me was about the delta between my fastest helmet (Scott Split) and my slowest helmet (a Giro Aeon).

Back to theory, it's not just about minimizing high pressure at the front of the bike/rider but also minimizing low pressure behind the bike/rider. The draft box on the Speed Concept and the deliberately shaped seat tube of the P5 accomplish this by helping to reattach flow behind the rider (Cervelo says as much in their P5 whitepaper). There's a small detail on the seat stays of the Shiv that I speculate could aid this (but I really doubt would have a huge impact). The theory behind the Dimond, IIRC, was that they were trying to minimize skin drag in addition to minimizing pressure drag and they approached the problem in a fashion similar to the Plasma 5: get most of your surface area in front of the rider (again, IIRC Smart said something to the effect that he's found for a given chord length you get more bang for your buck up front than out back).

With all of that said, I really think we're getting to the point with bikes where all you can do is hold the line in aero and innovate with storage integration, comfort, and wrench-ability. If I had a long-course race planned I would seriously consider the Ventum for it's integrated reservoir alone. That said, I'm sticking to short-course for the foreseeable future so I'm quite happy with my Speed Concept :)