All the current good bikes are good.
I'd like to see how my old P2K or 2013 P2 compare to the current bikes. but given that the test results mimic Cervelo's published data, I think I'll just believe the statements Cervelo have made over the years, about the drag of their bikes.
That said, to paraphrase Slowman from many years ago, "my P2 isn't what's keeping me off the podium"

---

TriDork

"Happiness is a myth. All you can hope for is to get laid once in a while, drunk once in a while and to eat chocolate every day"

+1
Like!

---

TriDork

"Happiness is a myth. All you can hope for is to get laid once in a while, drunk once in a while and to eat chocolate every day"

Sorry if this has been asked before in the previous pages, but for the data graph, what is the SE for the data?

Any thoughts or data for aero bottles on the frames of newer "Superbikes"? Specifically I'm thinking about Frodeno and Kienle (among others) racing with the Elite Crono on the down tube. They certainly have the means, time, and desire to sweat aero details so I'd be surprised if adding that bottle incurred an aero penalty. And Frodeno certainly isn't riding a small or medium SLX.

I think it is a little more difficult than you think. I tried to find a P4 and a set of 3t Ventus bars this year, but once you get down to specifics (e.g., a 54 cm P4 with the 2011 brakes so it actually kinda stops) the pickings have been slim to none on EBay. Issues like missing the aero bottle make it that much harder to cobble together a really fast combo.

As far as Chung testing and a PM. I am kinda there already. My setup is pretty dialed and the measurement error of small changes is hard to overcome.

What I find interesting is that people don't think 10 watts is that big a deal. 30-40 seconds over 40k is huge! I sure didn't find that much the last time I went to the WT.

Feels like Slowtwitch have doctored the summary to suit there alliance with Cervelo.

I don't think that is the case at all.

Dan did his write-up on the cover page but he was not involved in the testing or the report.

The report speaks for itself.

---

Dan Kennison

facebook: @triPremierBike
http://www.PremierBike.com
http://www.PositionOneSports.com

A good example of the effect of the base bar/levers is the testing of the P4. The P4 killed all the other SuperBikes when fitted with the Ventus. Specialized tested the nosecone Shiv against the P4 and showed that it was a bit faster, but it took a fugly looking Profile bar, sloppy cabling, and an inch or two of steer tube spacers.

Upgrading brakes is an inexpensive way to pick up a watt here or 3-5w there.
Bars are more complicated bc now you are having to plot out fit coordinates, if you can separate elbow pads from the base bar, which extensions fit, cable routing and all that time consuming stuff.

When you get to the average triathlete who isn't necessarily trying to be at the FOFOP they shrug and think that it's a lot of hassle. They look at all that, and up to 10x more expensive than the brake and say ehhhh I'll get a bit of bang with the brakes and call it good.

---

Brian Stover USAT LII
Accelerate3 Coaching
Insta

Yeah, the Ventus was the one that really - I think - opened people's eyes to how fast a bar could be. And, I might add, how un-usable (at least for certain races). But man it was fast. The Tactical base bar reminds me a lot of the Ventus, just with normal brake hoods.

The fastest bars - the original Ventus and USE Tula - both made serious ergonomic sacrifices. But I still feel like they opened the door a bit in terms of showing what was possible.

---

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

Is a NP3/NP2 with USE Tula bars going to be pretty much superbike worthy?

Exactly. There was an elaborate setup where Slowman temporarily banned Pubes in part for over-the-top criticisms of bikes that included the P5X. . And then Slowman expressed that the results of this test would require "extreme vetting" before he'd allow it on the site.

This was all an elaborate misdirection and marketing ploy by Cervelo. Follow the money, man.

Please.

Hello Trail and All,

Holy Batman Trail! You are on to it .... Pubes secretly owns Pon Holdings and he is a marketing genius.

Who knew?

---

Cheers, Neal

+1 mph Faster

Just to be contrary I'll point out that the original vision Trimax one piece bars predated Ventus by at least 10 years and were much the same principle - you get a little bit of pad width adjustment and that's it.

Ventus added extension length adjustment and a much longer airfoil, took away anything to hold on to by the brakes and gained a little speed (according to the 2007 Cervelo data). In the order of 20s over a 70.3.

With current Zipp, Enve, new Profile Design and (presumably) the forthcoming 51Speedshop bars you can have aero and decide on your position yourself, rather than have it dictated to you. Which is a big step forward.

I'd note that bars are a component that I've found to be ill served by bike only testing - interaction with the arms a fairly key element. Having a bulky pad harms a bar on it's own, but makes the rider happy. And then we have the debacle of straight and s-bend bars being forced on the world because they were faster in the tunnel (and looked fast), but cause a lot of people to pop their heads up.

I'd like to point out that I was given anonymised results to work with. As far as I could tell Bike 4 was fastest, then Bike 6.
It was only once the analysis was done that Kiley let me know which bikes corresponded to the codes.
Not that I'd be manipulating the results anyway - but we agreed that it was a good way to ensure that there would be no justification for claiming bias in the analysis.

Yup (with an Omega). And don't listen to Rappstar, both the Ventus and Tula are plenty comfy and easy to get along with.

What this test doesn't show is that CdA as a complete unit varies with the bike, regardless of how aero it tests; i.e. your fastest position on bike A is not necessarily your fastest position on bike B.

There's a lot of talk about your bars, but I haven't actually seen any pictures, apart from the one side-on image that's on the Slowtwitch article. Do you have any images to point us to?

---

'It never gets easier, you just get crazier.'

Some pictures. It's a really nice looking bar. I wish the TriRig Alpha Classic and the Tactical bar would have a baby that I could put on my Felt in a clean undermount configuration. But ultra low stack bars with standard stem clamps seem to be a thing of the past.

Very clean.

---

'It never gets easier, you just get crazier.'

So true. I'm on my third Torhans bottle. Cheap plastic that fails a lot.

Very nice. The worst looking thing are those stupid Di2 levers. I have always hated those things. Kiley should go ETap.

Those pics show the bike way better than anything on their website. It looks awesome. I don't know why they wouldn't take the time to put high res photos & video on their site to show it off. Seeing is believing, and with their sales model... Online image/impression is everything.

What do you want from both bars to make it a complete set-up. I have the classic's and have no issues with any set up I would like to run. OK other than tilt but I worked around that and a 3D print would solve that much better than I did.

One of the coolest things about those pics is that people get to see a bit of what we projected on the floor to help insure the positions were spot on.

pics 6451, 6453-55

---

Brian Stover USAT LII
Accelerate3 Coaching
Insta

I feel like I should put all my photos out here for the public to see?

---

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