i totally understand where youre coming from. theres not a single super bike on the market that fits long and low, the p4 is being discontinued too.

im on a 55cm cervelo p3sl with a -35degree 120mm stem
stack: 507
reach: 430

to try to fit a cervelo p5 id need a 54cm with a look ergostem or some other really weird overly long stem.
stack: 52.2
reach: 41.1

Actually, I think all you need is another bar and stem. A Look ergostem would probably be a good idea in this case.



It shouldn't be.

If someone was considering getting one of these bikes with the Arduro bar, I'd highly encourage them to either have a fit they KNOW they want to reproduce on the P5, OR don't order it until you've finalized your touchpoint locations (either through personal experimentation or a professional fitting).

It's a "race bike", not a "fit bike" ;-)

---

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

I have this: my P2C with adjustable stem. I'm getting fit on it, riding it, experimenting, etc.

But over the course of a season, or even year to year, people never say "I wonder if I might put down more power if I were up 1cm, let me try it next race"?

IME, the range of bar heights that one can put out equivalent powers is fairly wide, especially if one is keeping body angles consistent (as one should). At that point, it's all about finding the position that reduces your CdA the most and allows for other race considerations (i.e. being able to look up the road, digestion, etc.). Once you've found that, why would you move again?

---

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

If someone was considering getting one of these bikes with the Arduro bar, I'd highly encourage them to either have a fit they KNOW they want to reproduce on the P5, OR don't order it until you've finalized your touchpoint locations.

Thats going to be a pretty small market. If we go back to the beginning of 2011 you wpuld've eliminated Crowie, Cancellara, DZ, Tony Martin, and I think all three Grand Tour winners. I certainly wouldn't drop that much on an aero bar without at least being awfull confident that my fit is close, but I'd wager that the vast majority of cyclists that prioritise TT riding fiddle constantly.

---

Styrrell

I think you're engaging in a bit of "apples and oranges" comparison here...

Oh, and STOP FIDDLING! ;-)

---

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

Why is it apples and oranges? If World champions still try to refine their positions after winning top level races, when they had tons of resources to help get them to a perfect fit during their careers, why do you think amateurs should be able to settle on a perfect fit and not have to change?

---

Styrrell

The thing is that days good enough for field testing are very rare. I had 2 days in 2011 that were good enough. There were 2 other days I thought were good enough, but turned out not to be when I examined the data afterwards. So there's a limit to how quickly I can make progress on optimising my position. I got a couple of aspects fairly well nailed down last year, but have more ideas for improvement.

What if a new helmet comes onto the market that you want to try? It might change your optimum position compared to your existing helmet.

What if you want to try shorter cranks, and need to raise your saddle up, and hence your pads to keep your optimum position?

I can see what they were aiming for - the Speed Concept arguably has excessive adjustability, and it places some bulky and unaero shapes at the front of the bike. But I tend to think you could arrange a method of raising the pads and extensions up and down together, independently of the base bar, without adding all that bulk that the Speed Concept has.

It's apples and oranges from the standpoint that you're comparing folks who are basically given and told what to ride vs. someone making a conscious decision about a piece of equipment they'll purchase with their own funds. I'm thinking the latter will be less likely to have to make "adjustments" or compromises to the position they want to re-create.



And I believe in the above cases you mention, those changes were AFTER they took advantage of those resources right? Be it wind tunnel testing or "fitting", right? OK, so I'm glad you agree with my assertion above :-)


I think EVERYONE can get themselves into a position which is in a "sweetspot", i.e. where minor changes from that position will have little, if any effect on their speed vs. power. The "perfect position" for anyone has a bit of "squishiness" to it, where 1cm here nor there really doesn't change things IMHO.

One thing I think a LOT of people get caught up in is chasing power at the expense of speed...and sometimes the pros (and their handlers) are the worst at this. <Cue examples of Eddy Merckxx constantly fiddling with his seat height...or, Armstrong (and Ferrari) rejecting the Trek "narrow bike" merely because his power was lower over long intervals, despite actually being faster>

Besides, constant position fiddling is probably more a symptom of OCD and/or ADD than anything else ;-)

---

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

That's not the case for me, moving up or down 1cm from my optimum position is 7W in one direction, and 10W in the other. I think once I get away from that position there is massively less change per cm, but at that crucial tipping point it seems to be very sensitive indeed to tiny changes. And don't even get me started on the difference one degree of saddle tilt can make, that's what I need to nail down when I next get chance to test, but I believe it's pretty massive for me, as it affects how high up the peak of my back is.

I think you're seriously overestimating the percentage of triathletes who have the optimal position figured out to the point that it won't ever change. I'd say it's a minuscule group.. not just the newbies.

Of course you *can* change it, buy buying a new fork.. Maybe the solution is just to have a quiver of forks! Or start a fork-swap program here on slowtwitch! :)

No. The solution is to follow the advice in my first reply.

---

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

The whole point I'm making is that "don't order it until you've finalized your touchpoint locations" reduces the target audience to a tiny demographic. Do you dispute this?

Not that there's anything wrong with designing something for the hardcore experienced folks and pro's. It's combining it with a design that allows riding in a position similar to that of a hybrid that makes it slightly more head scratching.

yes because you can use any bar you want.
this is a downside of the Aduro, not of the P5.

furthermore I will bet a few pesos that some armpad risers are or will be available (or that you can use some existing 3t ones) to do adjustments anyway.

hell you can double up the pads =)

---

---

Kat Hunter reports on the San Dimas Stage Race from inside the GC winning team
Aeroweenie.com -Compendium of Aero Data and Knowledge
Freelance sports & outdoors writer Kathryn Hunter

I was referring to the Aduro itself, but yeah I agree.


Yep. I was thinking this. And I could imagine 3T potentially making a different riser thingy eventually to be in between the low and high...

Tom,

I think you are underestimating the number of Pro riders who keep their positions the same during the year. Small body changes, such as weight loss/gain, flexibility, as well as different courses may lead to a change of position for even the best riders in the world.

For example, there are quite a few guys who will change up their position slightly for the Redlands classic TT. Raising the bar a CM or so to allow for a slightly better climbing position. Protour riders have done this as well in TTs with a flat section mixed with a serious climb.

An interesting aspect to the bars and their design.....this is from the 3T press release re: the Aduro bars.


Looks like I am gonna have to dump the Vision bars that came with my new P2 and put on the Profile T2+ I had on my S2.

(Which I was gonna do anyway....prefer S-bends and I can get lower with those bars)

---

Chicago Cubs - 2016 WORLD SERIES Champions!!!!

"If ever the time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin." - Samuel Adams

Wow, interesting! So the "Low" setup, which will likely be most common among those trying to get aero... is the worst!

??? How are you getting that? Doesn't the "low" position essentially puts the elbows on the basebar, as they note in the press release?

---

Chicago Cubs - 2016 WORLD SERIES Champions!!!!

"If ever the time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin." - Samuel Adams

No, that's the "X-Lo", which has no reach adjustability. http://wenoticed.slowtwitch.com/...tack-and-reach-chart


In the main P5 thread Damon said they don't expect many will use X-Lo

am i reading the chart wrong, b/c an armrest stack of 525 isnt that low.

does anyone have a picture of the set up of "X-LO"

elbows rest on the basebar in both setups I believe.

in X-lo the basebar is upside down, and lower

---

---

Kat Hunter reports on the San Dimas Stage Race from inside the GC winning team
Aeroweenie.com -Compendium of Aero Data and Knowledge
Freelance sports & outdoors writer Kathryn Hunter

Oh.. I thought they looked a few cm up in the pictures I saw, but you might be right.

obviously we need to get a few sets of these in our hands so we can get first hand data

for science

damon rinard, contact me I'll send you my address

---

---

Kat Hunter reports on the San Dimas Stage Race from inside the GC winning team
Aeroweenie.com -Compendium of Aero Data and Knowledge
Freelance sports & outdoors writer Kathryn Hunter

Looks like there's a lifter in there to me, eh?

And I believe in the above cases you mention, those changes were AFTER they took advantage of those resources right? Be it wind tunnel testing or "fitting", right? OK, so I'm glad you agree with my assertion above :-)


I agree a lot with your assertions when you imagine I'm saying something different than what I've said;-) Those voices aside of course those riders had experts help them make changes, just like they had expert put them in their previous postions. DZ for instance had sponser make a dummy of his body and do lots of testing well before his current round of positioning, and Cancelara has gone back and forth on stack afew times.

I think EVERYONE can get themselves into a position which is in a "sweetspot", i.e. where minor changes from that position will have little, if any effect on their speed vs. power. The "perfect position" for anyone has a bit of "squishiness" to it, where 1cm here nor there really doesn't change things IMHO.

One thing I think a LOT of people get caught up in is chasing power at the expense of speed...and sometimes the pros (and their handlers) are the worst at this. <Cue examples of Eddy Merckxx constantly fiddling with his seat height...or, Armstrong (and Ferrari) rejecting the Trek "narrow bike" merely because his power was lower over long intervals, despite actually being faster>

I agree with what you said above, and that why spending hunderds of dollars on a set of aerobars with very limited adjustability might not be very marketable. People can get into a set position, but they rarely do.

Besides, constant position fiddling is probably more a symptom of OCD and/or ADD than anything else ;-)

Ah name calling

---

Styrrell

I've never been able to settle into one, "final" TT position. To me, that's like saying, "this is as fast as I'll ever go" and I'm not willing to concede that. At 56 years old, it might have been wise to have conceded that a while back, but I'm still kickin', so I'm still fiddlin'!