What are the thoughts for the rest of us that have not bought super bikes but have optimized our aero equipment on bikes like the P2C and P3C. Are we losing that much without being in the tunnel to test position and clothing/helmets? It would seem from the test that the FELT tested well with the modifications and we know that the older Cervelos tested fast.

I am not that impressed with the idea of upgrading an older bike. If you look at the recent articles on the front page for aerobars you realize that these projects aren't cheap! The ENVE bar and stem are probably close to 1500$. I have seen the drilled top tubes to internally route cables on the old P2 and P3 and that scares the crap out of me. ETap solves a lot of these problems, other than where to put the blip box, but even a 1x system is close to 1000$ installed. TriRigs are 400$.

In contrast, you can pick up an Speed Concept 7.5 frame for 2900$ And move your wheels and groupo across. While it wasn't tested, I bet it is within 2 watts of the P5 out to 5 or 7 degrees and it is a bit faster at higher yaw angles.

What the test reinforces is that choice of frame (among the good ones, still don't get a Kuota) is fairly low down the priority list for purchasing speed compared to other changes.
I collect test data and perform my own testing. Here are some differences for Kiley at IM70.3 Chattanooga



Things like bar and bottle location are going to have variation with individuals.
Tyre impact for both aero and rolling is going to depend on batch and amount of use of the tyres (I tested lightly used ones for aero and rolling)

Some of the biggest impacts on there are quite cheap. Worrying about one set of good wheels vs another not a good use of time/$. Worrying about frame should primarily be about your position, then get a Cervelo ;) to make sure you're not giving anything away.

Of course - this is one of the benefits of the Tactical. Most of those boxes are already ticked (+super chain). So it's good out of the box.
But that would be boring for you as you've already gone hunting all those upgrades (+Tune gumgum)

I still think in cobbling stuff together you come out well ahead financially relative to most other options, especially if you can snag some things used. You can get a great condition used new-gen 2/3 frame for $600 and I see new (from dealers) Felt B frames on Ebay for $1400 regularly. $1200 for the front end and $400 for the brakes. $1k for Ultegra Di2. Yeah of course $2k-$3k for a frameset and $4k for a frameset + group -- that is a lot of money obviously but it's for a top of line build and not many stock bikes can beat that value. The SC 7 is a great option too of course but wow is this year's one paint scheme hideous and you can no longer get the non UCI legal build with the bangin base bar at that level in the product line.

I have been able to pick up parts here and there for cheap. TriRig Aerobars for $400, other parts pouched from other builds, 1x done stupid cheap as I don't buy into the hype of clutch and narrow/wide. Mods done for $25 to run cables more aero behind the stem. Modifying a build to be more aero does not have to cost thousands like others have mentioned. The next step of course is to get a PM to start to test position changes and then final would be tunnel time.

We will be making those hard choices even more difficult in 60 - 90 days.

New with warranty and your time sourcing are also worth a lot.

---

Dan Kennison

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

Dead right, doesn't have to cost the earth. I picked up a 2nd hand set of Devox Bayonet bars for a hundred bucks and a Tririg Sigma and Omega for similar money each. Mechanical (Ultegra) but you cannot see any of my cables from the front. Ok, I did drill my top tube (P3C) but I'm not at all worried about that.

a speed concept 7 series is as fast as a p5-6? i can only assume you mean with those mods.

fwiw, i got a set of enve aerobars for $250 shipped.

for aerodynamics.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

you would be losing if other people didn't go to the tunnel and report back to you what was fast. relatively few of even the really fast people have positions that were altered by the tunnel. that doesn't mean they didn't find a faster way to ride. it takes another, special kind of talent to learn to ride in a way not natural to you in order to get all the aero benefits available.

i think there's plenty for everyone here in this test. during the first 15 years of this century bikes got faster and faster. we're in a period now where bikes are remaining fast, or getting slightly faster, while allowing you to drink, eat, carry stuff, work on and travel with the bike, stop with safety, fit yourself aboard them easily, rest your weight on them comfortably, and they handle well. can you get all that on an old P2? yes. but it's a little tougher. hydration, storage, spares, when you load up those bikes with the stuff you need they get incrementally slower if you don't use real foresight.

the low hanging fruit is still fit, position, comfort, and technique.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

I thought about this, and I agree, altering a position is pretty tough in the tunnel. Now tweaking it, well even a 5mm difference here and there can make someone near super bike drag on a not even close to super bike bike.

I may have mentioned this before Dan. We should do a something where you fly in and do a fitting then we put them in the tunnel to refine their position. Which in some respects is how bike fitting should be done since many fitters make people comfy but with high drag numbers.

What are you doing July 11? We've got some people testing that day but can fit in a few more if anyone wanted to test. Or we could do a big camp in early spring. You could make it a stop on the road show.

---

Brian Stover USAT LII
Accelerate3 Coaching
Insta

This would be an interesting exercise. Someone that is comfortable and has a reasonably good fit - then refine the fit for aero - then add the best helmet and suit while holding the new aero position.

Maybe de-cable the bike and have some stems and spacers so its an easy adjustment.

I'd be happy to provide a Tactical since we just got some baseline numbers.

---

Dan Kennison

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

I would definitely fly somewhere and drop a decent chunk of change for a session like this.

---

Matt

Dan, what about the rest of us that are doing sprints and Olympic distance where all of the integration is not as important. I know that most focus on the longer events with such tests but I never have to carry food, never carry a spare and use a BTA for water. So all of that integration does not matter to me. So with that in mind, what do you think about this test when someone does not have to worry about all the extras?

I'm going to jump in here since at AeroCamp we've done a ton of testing on short course only triathletes. some of what I say will be generalizations and some will be specific tests I remember off the top of my head.

On some/many of the older generation bikes some of that storage stuff can make the bike faster. There are 2 different bikes out there where we saw adding aero bottles to the frames saved a few watts. Now these are among the smaller/est sizes but even on my bike, which is a medium, running a round down tube bottle is neutral. We've confirmed this on 2 other riders on my same frame in the past. But on large size of my bike everyone has been slower with a frame bottle, significantly slower. Maybe this is a situation where storage designed into the frame would be beneficial.

BTA's for the most part have shown to save some watts or are neutral at worst.

some of the older bikes, it was a QR that I'm remembering but which QR escapes me, a bento box was much faster, 5-7w iirc. We've seen that across some/many of the older bikes but on several of the newer bikes we've seen bento boxes perform worse.

Some of these bikes where integration is designed in, it's faster than if you took it off or if you added it aftermarket. There is no downfall to having it in these cases. But the long course market is what is catered to in the tri bike industry (or so it seems to me) and rightly so. It's always easier to subtract vs add. The penalties are usually greater for add then subtracting.

If you think back several years a lot of tri bikes only have frame bosses for 1 bottle which was stupid for training. Faster forward and nearly all of them have bosses for 2 bottles. I'm not going to mention the brand but a bike company told me adding a bosses for a 2nd frame cage was adding something like 50-60gms of drag. Now though design has moved ahead where this probably isn't the case or those grams are the cost of entry.

I don't think there is a clear cut answer if you're only a short course racer.

---

Brian Stover USAT LII
Accelerate3 Coaching
Insta

Thanks to all involved.

I love that the results show the Felt was right up there despite not being a "super bike". This study confirms I made a good choice to buy my new P3 in 2015 over the P5 as it is likely very close in performance when built up well just like the Felt.

I assume a Felt IA16 for $3,000 is still a solid platform for someone wanting a nice frame upon which to start with and give them the opportunity to upgrade over time? The IA should test even better than the B with similar parts spec, right?

It is interesting to see the results. I would have been curious to see where something like the Speed Concept would have fallen, especially since the current design has been out a few years.

If we look at the evidence out there on the Felt IA head to head vs the Premier Tactical I think it's somewhat safe to assume that the IA will fall between the control bike and the Tactical.

---

Brian Stover USAT LII
Accelerate3 Coaching
Insta

The only caviate is that the IA tested in the Tactical-IA testing at San Diego had upgraded Brakes, base bar and extensions. So to get it close will cost a bit from a stock IA.

---

Dan Kennison

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

We had a bunch of people offer Speed Concepts but none in Kiley's size.

Would have been interesting.

Given the number of people that have remarked they'd like to see Bike A or Bike B maybe it's time for someone to switch from talking to action and gather up the bikes!

---

Brian Stover USAT LII
Accelerate3 Coaching
Insta

If you look at the bike only data I emailed you yesterday, it's dubious if changing the stock aero brake is an upgrade ;-)

I think ultimately bars are the bigger(est) upgrade when it comes to front ends which is why I dig your basebars so much.

---

Brian Stover USAT LII
Accelerate3 Coaching
Insta

Not really replying to you, Brian, but I think one of the big takeaways here is the basebar. I'd *guess* a big reason the Tactical does so well is that very slender base bar. Given what Tom A and others have posted about the drag from going "aero-or-die," the differences in base bar could be enough to substantially re-order some of these frames. Especially if you consider those frames that have a standard steerer tube and which could use a different bar/stem combo than what was tested.

Given my own bias, I certainly wonder how the Andean would do with a different bar setup, since I don't think the HED Corsair is particularly good.

It's interesting that we talk about this as a "frame" test, but really it's frame+bars, and bars make a big difference... How much faster, for example, would the Ventum be if they made a Tactical-esque base bar?

---

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

We'v recently done this in the tunnel with a fit bike. Quick position changes...very efficient.

We thought we'd be missing the interaction between the athlete and bike, but a fast position on one bike is a fast position on any bike.

---

Jim Manton / ERO Sports