My bike history is along these lines:
2009 - 2010: get into triathlon, buy Planet X frameset off ST (it was too small)
2011-2012: Cervelo P3
2013-2015: Cervelo P5
2016-2017 Cervelo P3 (also a "classic" P3)
I definitely have exhibited a strong bias towards Canadian triathlon bikes. When I worked at the Cervelo dealer back in NC, it was an obvious choice and I consumed as much of the kool-aid as I could. (FWIW, I don't use "kool aid" negatively, kool aid is a delicious beverage). A post of Damon's here on ST that has stuck with me for some time was about the design of the P5 and how Cervelo had tried unconventional designs (testing against an "optimized" Zipp 2001 I think?) to best the P5 but had been remarkably unsuccessful. In fact, the more you like at and aggregate most wind tunnel data from various wheel, bike, and equipment tests the more a "traditional" tri bike tends to always come out on top. Dimond's data, at best, promotes skepticism. As the other main "unconventional" bike out there that is popular that is obviously the main comparison point to something like a Ventum.
I remember also a huge thread about the "white paper" Ventum provided when they tested at Faster 1-1.5 years ago and there was also skepticism around that data. The more I read and hear about other tests that have not been publicized the more I think the Ventum might actually be pretty damn fast. I still definitely bias towards "conventional" design from an aesthetics standpoint (I still think the P5 in black red and current paint, not the red/white, is a phenomenal looking bike) and is tough to beat aerodynamically BUT the Ventum has definitely left me more intrigued than any other "small" or "boutique" manufacturer to this point.
The sales manager for Ventum was in Tucson today and was kind enough to come by our house so we (my girlfriend and I) could test ride a couple of Ventums. That is a big point for them as far as customer service goes, and we aren't even customers... The roads around our house are pretty crappy save a couple, so the riding was done on our neighborhood circle (maybe a 1/4mi loop), a crappy neighborhood road (lots of gravel washed onto road, rough pavement), and a smoothly paved road (down at the bottom of aforementioned road).
I have to say that I was legitimately impressed with how the bike rode. I'm not a Bicycling magazine author, so I'm not going to go too much into the "feel" of the bike as I think that's mostly crap designed to say things about bikes when you have to fill a 1200 word column. But, I will let myself say that it rode really, really smooth.
I remember when I switched from the "classic" P3 to the P5 I was blown away at the compliance change between those two bikes. My first ride on the P5 was actually a half ironman in White Lake, NC which is generally known for being flat but having pretty frustrating pavement. The P5 rode incredibly well compared to the P3 I had been riding (and I had raced on that course on both bikes). If I remember correctly, the wheels were the same and my tire choice was the same, along with my saddle being the same, so the only real difference was the frameset.
The Ventum feels like that. Incredibly smooth. Most of my "test riding" (I actually hate test riding in general, as confirmation bias is too strong) involved hard accelerations out of turns, braking into turns, etc as that was more how I feel like a tri bikes rides differently than a road bike. All tri bikes go pretty fast in a straight line, the difference is how they ride in between those straight lines. The Ventum SEEMS to ride more akin to a road bike. Most of its weight is nestled just forward of the bottom bracket. A Dimond, for example, has most of its weight out in that head tube area. So an already forward biased bike (like any tri bike) becomes WAY more forward biased. Perhaps due to that, the Ventum felt more "grounded" so to speak. A bit more predictable than most tri bikes I can remember riding (certainly more predictable than my classic P3, which has a super short stem).
The finish quality is extremely good, much better than what I'd expect out of a "small" brand.
(note, this isn't the actual one I test rode, this was the lady's ride)
Two things of note in this picture:
1) The stem junction definitely looks awkward. Even more so with the spacers in there. That's obviously not necessary as the desired armpad stack can be achieved in other ways but yea, the gap between the stem and water bottle is just that, awkward. I'd definitely try to DIY something that fills that in visually. Ideally though, Ventum come up with a clever way to disguise that.
2) Amount of the bike behind the wheel's axle. Dan writes a lot about this, but it definitely seems like something that makes the bike handle quite a bit more predictably. I'm unsure of what the rake angle of the bike is, so I can't comment on that beyond the subjective "it rides real good."
Again, slightly mitigated by the disappearance of those stem spacers but, yuck.
That's a GP4k 700x23 on relatively wide rims, so obviously there's a fair amount of clearance built into the fork/brake. This is a demo bike, so the dirtiness of the bike is not its fault...
2009 - 2010: get into triathlon, buy Planet X frameset off ST (it was too small)
2011-2012: Cervelo P3
2013-2015: Cervelo P5
2016-2017 Cervelo P3 (also a "classic" P3)
I definitely have exhibited a strong bias towards Canadian triathlon bikes. When I worked at the Cervelo dealer back in NC, it was an obvious choice and I consumed as much of the kool-aid as I could. (FWIW, I don't use "kool aid" negatively, kool aid is a delicious beverage). A post of Damon's here on ST that has stuck with me for some time was about the design of the P5 and how Cervelo had tried unconventional designs (testing against an "optimized" Zipp 2001 I think?) to best the P5 but had been remarkably unsuccessful. In fact, the more you like at and aggregate most wind tunnel data from various wheel, bike, and equipment tests the more a "traditional" tri bike tends to always come out on top. Dimond's data, at best, promotes skepticism. As the other main "unconventional" bike out there that is popular that is obviously the main comparison point to something like a Ventum.
I remember also a huge thread about the "white paper" Ventum provided when they tested at Faster 1-1.5 years ago and there was also skepticism around that data. The more I read and hear about other tests that have not been publicized the more I think the Ventum might actually be pretty damn fast. I still definitely bias towards "conventional" design from an aesthetics standpoint (I still think the P5 in black red and current paint, not the red/white, is a phenomenal looking bike) and is tough to beat aerodynamically BUT the Ventum has definitely left me more intrigued than any other "small" or "boutique" manufacturer to this point.
The sales manager for Ventum was in Tucson today and was kind enough to come by our house so we (my girlfriend and I) could test ride a couple of Ventums. That is a big point for them as far as customer service goes, and we aren't even customers... The roads around our house are pretty crappy save a couple, so the riding was done on our neighborhood circle (maybe a 1/4mi loop), a crappy neighborhood road (lots of gravel washed onto road, rough pavement), and a smoothly paved road (down at the bottom of aforementioned road).
I have to say that I was legitimately impressed with how the bike rode. I'm not a Bicycling magazine author, so I'm not going to go too much into the "feel" of the bike as I think that's mostly crap designed to say things about bikes when you have to fill a 1200 word column. But, I will let myself say that it rode really, really smooth.
I remember when I switched from the "classic" P3 to the P5 I was blown away at the compliance change between those two bikes. My first ride on the P5 was actually a half ironman in White Lake, NC which is generally known for being flat but having pretty frustrating pavement. The P5 rode incredibly well compared to the P3 I had been riding (and I had raced on that course on both bikes). If I remember correctly, the wheels were the same and my tire choice was the same, along with my saddle being the same, so the only real difference was the frameset.
The Ventum feels like that. Incredibly smooth. Most of my "test riding" (I actually hate test riding in general, as confirmation bias is too strong) involved hard accelerations out of turns, braking into turns, etc as that was more how I feel like a tri bikes rides differently than a road bike. All tri bikes go pretty fast in a straight line, the difference is how they ride in between those straight lines. The Ventum SEEMS to ride more akin to a road bike. Most of its weight is nestled just forward of the bottom bracket. A Dimond, for example, has most of its weight out in that head tube area. So an already forward biased bike (like any tri bike) becomes WAY more forward biased. Perhaps due to that, the Ventum felt more "grounded" so to speak. A bit more predictable than most tri bikes I can remember riding (certainly more predictable than my classic P3, which has a super short stem).
The finish quality is extremely good, much better than what I'd expect out of a "small" brand.
(note, this isn't the actual one I test rode, this was the lady's ride)
Two things of note in this picture:
1) The stem junction definitely looks awkward. Even more so with the spacers in there. That's obviously not necessary as the desired armpad stack can be achieved in other ways but yea, the gap between the stem and water bottle is just that, awkward. I'd definitely try to DIY something that fills that in visually. Ideally though, Ventum come up with a clever way to disguise that.
2) Amount of the bike behind the wheel's axle. Dan writes a lot about this, but it definitely seems like something that makes the bike handle quite a bit more predictably. I'm unsure of what the rake angle of the bike is, so I can't comment on that beyond the subjective "it rides real good."
Again, slightly mitigated by the disappearance of those stem spacers but, yuck.
That's a GP4k 700x23 on relatively wide rims, so obviously there's a fair amount of clearance built into the fork/brake. This is a demo bike, so the dirtiness of the bike is not its fault...
Last edited by:
James Haycraft: Apr 10, 17 15:22
