Not sure on the P5/6, I know that a mate has been told his Giant Trinity is ok (the tri version) with the bottle and Vento box removed. The P5/6 fork may still be too big for the new rules not sure though.

Dimension Data still seem to be on the P5/3, however given that at low yaws thete is little difference even if the P5/6 was legal Ì guess there would be no reason to change and they use Enve stem/aerobars.

Yes, I'm trying to avoid buying the P5 3 fork.

If your saddle is 5mm or more behind the bb Ì think you now get up to 80cm rather than the 75cm.

I think I am still going to gave to bring my bars in a bit for Albi on my Plasma 3. Contemplating switch to etap to remove shifters length, plus I tend to run a 1x setup so should make it easy to switch to 2x for hiller courses.

The exemption application has been clarified that you can have either but not both, regardless of height.
So if you're 50mm+ behind (easy with a cutoff saddle) you can go out to 800.
Note that the 800 includes the whole of your shifters now

The P5-6 won't be legal under the new rules as it breaks the bounding box rule for the headtube junction - those rules were not changed and the P5-3 was built to the limit. The max depth of the HT is 160mm - the P5-3 is 158mm.

There are two fairings that cover the break line and the caliper. Would simply removing these make the bike legal? I thought the P5 six and the P 5 three were the same frames with the exception of the fork, brakes, and associated fairings.

I'm fairly certain the P5-6 is okay as long as you remove the beard.

They are the same frame. By removing the beard and shroud you should be legal as the HT depth is no longer contravened. Fork being 6:1 no longer a problem.
Then cross your fingers that the commissaire knows the rules

Is the shiv allowed?

If you are over 190cm, you get an extra 50mm of reach for a total of 850mm.

No, the 80mm depth rule was not changed. So the IA and Shiv are still well out of bounds.
Basically frames can now be 3.2 to 1 instead of 3:1 as the min width is 25mm. It's really not the relaxing of the rules that some were making it out to be. Certainly brands aren't going to be rushing to design to the new limit as few bikes are narrow anymore.

And I'm thankful for that (not so good for little brother at 188). But the OP is 5'11 so didn't want to burden him with something that doesn't help him.

Too bad. I just go a Madone 6 months ago with intent to do some road cycling races and destination trips. Would have been nice to be able to do some TT's as well. When I bought the Shiv, I had no desire for this but I don't feel like getting another frame.

This. I just received my new (2013) P5 six frame and it has a UCI sticker embedded in the top tube. I'm sure if you email Ross Shepard at Cervelo, he can confirm.

The fork should still have a depth of no more than 80 mm. I don't know what the depth of the P5-6 fork is.

 
My experience at the UCI worlds is 10 years old, so take it FWIW. When I asked for a morphological exception on the 5cm setback, they insisted that they "don't do that for Masters." I speak relatively fluent German, so this wasn't a language issue I was compelled to push my seat back at the start-house.

---

My latest book: "Out of the Melting Pot, Into the Fire" is on sale on Amazon and at other online and local booksellers

TPerry wrote:

Considering racing Master's Worlds TT later this summer. With the UCI aero rule changes, is the Cervelo P5 Six now UCI legal? I believe in the past it was not a UCI legal bike due to the depth of the fork. Secondly, I am 5'11" so not unusually tall or short. Can I still claim a morphological exemption to allow me to extend the tips of my aero bars out to 80 cm? Is this something that requires a lot of discussion with the UCI officials at starting time that could possibly be denied just before my start, or is it simply a matter of making a simple statement that I'm taking the exemption?

If you want the right answer you should to go the source.

http://www.uci.ch/mm/Document/News/Rulesandregulation/16/51/61/ClarificationGuideoftheUCITechnicalRegulation-2017.01.01-ENG_English.pdf



"For the track and road competitions covered by the first paragraph, the distance of 75 cm may be increased to 80 cm to the extent that this is required for morphological reasons; «morphological reasons» should be taken as meaning anything regarding the size or length of the rider's body parts. A rider who, for this reason, considers that he needs to make use of a distance between 75 and 80 cm must inform the commissaires' panel at the time of the bike check. For riders that are 190 cm tall or taller, the horizontal distance between the vertical lines passing through the bottom bracket axle and the extremity of the handlebar extensions including all accessories may be extended to 85 cm. Only one exemption for morphological reasons may be requested; either the handlebar extension can be moved forward or the peak of the saddle can be moved forward, in accordance with Article 1.3.013.”

---

Kevin

http://kevinmetcalfe.dreamhosters.com
My Strava

I just completed some aero testing with the ENVE bar and new stem on the P5-3 this week. That stem is a nice improvement! I'll release some info soon.

---

Jim Manton / ERO Sports

Ok, I received word from Cervelo that the fork on the P5 six is not legal. Additionally, as discussed the two fairings over the front brake need to be removed, as well as- and this surprised me- the cover over the rear brake.

Better than the Aduro? Guessing the P5 is still up there in the bikes you test?

For a while I think Steve Cummings go away with using part of the fairing over the brake on a P5 3.

Hey, Jim. I'm assuming that the Enve bars/ stem is the one shown on their website, and that they are UCI compliant, and can house a Di2 junction box. Also, your post "gently alludes" to them testing better than my Aduro bars. Is this all correct? I wonder how this combo with the P3 fork would test against my stock P5 six? Thanks.

Hmmm, not sure what I can and can't say just yet. And, honestly, I'd need to look up some numbers from previous tunnel and velodrome testing with this athlete, but I would say the ENVE SES with a standard stem is at least as fast as the Aduro, but faster for most when considering the added position adjustments you can make. Now, add the new stem in there, and I think there's no doubt it's faster on what is still one of the best bikes out there. In fact, I suspect it's one of the best performers in the upcoming A2 test results, though I haven't seen the numbers. (I absolutely know one manufacturer came away happy, and another is already wanting a new test).

I should be able to post some data in a few days.

---

Jim Manton / ERO Sports

Thanks for sharing Jim, that's really interesting. Looking at the P5/3 as a new TT option (or more realistically 2nd hand option). The Aurdo is certainly not a bike fitters / aero testers friend and it is all about position!

Jim, aero data aside does the ENVE bar and stem allow for use of the Magura hydraulic brakes with cable routing straight down from stem to brake?
thanks