Hello all.

I am looking for a new tri bike and Felt is very high on the list at this point, specifically the B2 or B12 (the tax return will make the difference...). I have seen plenty of aero data on here and other sites about the various Cervelos, the Specialized Transition, and the Trek TTX, but don't recall having seen any data on the Felts. Is any out there, particularly relative to other bikes at the top end? Given that Felt is always touting their windtunnel work, I would think some data would have snuck out here or there.

Thanks,
Kevin

hey, superdave I'm toying with the idea of selling my F3 and buying an AR 4 (I won't get into how bummed out I am that I can,t get this as a frameset) but I'm wondering, based on your last post, is the 2010 AR going to face changes based on the new UCI 3:1 stance?

Does the stock 2009 b12 adhere to the UCI guidelines? Or is the aerobar setup in violation of the 3:1 rule?

As an amateur, do UCI rules like that affect me if I want to race a local road race and time trial?

You could always get together with some other manufacturers and pay some independent body to test the bikes.

When sending in a bike to this test, each manufacturer gets to pick the bike, wheels, tyres etc. Get it fit by a recognised independent person to an average bloke. Results come out and at long last, we have an answer!

What's the matter? Scared? ;-)

"pay some independent body"

Oh that seems like a marketing budget shoot out.

Finding that independent body doesn't seem as easy as you might think. Who would you suggest?

Hell...just send each bike to me and I'll take them one at a time over to the halfpipe course and "Chung" 'em ;-)

WAAAY cheaper than a wind tunnel...the only "cost" would be that I get to keep the bikes :-)

Sure, and then in my second paragraph in our catalog I can say our frame was verified fastest by Tom A. on ST using the chung feild testing method: So then, how do I convince the other 99.813% of the buying public?

I'll do it if you want!

Tell someone who is not in the cycling world, but gets aerodynamics, to organise the testing at a location unknown to you. Tell them to speak to some guys who know how to test bikes to avoid common pitfalls. All companys going along pay $X per bike up to a max of 3. Feel free to send along competitors bikes that are too scared to go themselves to show how bad they are.

Of course, not everyone can come out on top so it's unlikely to ever happen!

I think the top 5 are already pretty well known. The configuration that will be submitted will favor each brand's own knowledge of what makes their bikes fastest. It doesn't seem fair to think you'd allow me to submit a 48cm DA with double disc wheels, Sante derailleurs, Scott extreme bars, Modolo front brake, etc...and again, what use woud THAT data be to me? Surely you'd see impressive numbers but how would that translate to the bikes you see in transition?[/quote]So you'd stick to UCI or Tri rules. Additionally, you'd only allow people to use commercially available products. And yes, within those rules the brands would use the optimal kit for that particular bike. I don't get why that's a bad thing. Surely it's more financially viable for the manufacturers to work out the optimal kit than the customers? Also, you wouldn't submit the 48cm bike because it's being set-up for a person of an average size.

If your bike hasn't hidden the cables properly then it won't perform as well as one that has in the test. that's sort of the point of the proposed test!

I wonder who brand S could be!?! :-D

My view of what sells bikes is skewed by this forum so is there any chance you could let on why people buy a certain tri bike? Is it weight, what their LBS sells, what their favourite rider uses, aerodynamics or possibly the reviews they see? Why is it that so many people pay huge sms of money for Zipp/HED wheels and Cervelo frames? The common factor to me is that they publish data and have sponsored riders (and some riders who go against sponsorship obligations to switch).

In the UK, a LOT of TTers use Planet X bikes. I'd guess that if you could state that your bike went X mph faster in tests than theirs that people would be more willing to switch. As it stands currently your average person just sees two bikes that both have aerodynamic tubes and they assume that they're basically the same.

Thanks very much for replying btw, I know that some of us can be a right pain on this forum sometimes!

Brand "S" could be Scott, Specialized, Stevens, Soma, Surley, Sigma, Seven, Schwinn, Shogun, Saracen, Spot, Saab, Somec, Serotta, or it could just be a common letter used to represent a generic company and the industries' tendency to claim outlandish details that are nearly impossible to verify or disprove.

People buy triathlon bikes to race triathlons. That is unlike nearly every other type of bike in terms of target audience. The first time buyer is much MUCH different than the second time buyer. The forum does tend to skew reality at times, I'd bet that there are more people that buy triathlon bikes without ever reading exactly how they should do it here.

The only way all those UK PX riders would switch is if PX raised the price considerably and/or suggested themselves that their bike was not as fast as one of the aforementioned "top 5". Why would they listen to another company trying to sell them a new bike?

I'm using this old Dell computer because I asked Dell if I should switch to one of them new fancy Apple SuperduperBOOK things, Dell said I needn't switch brands, but advised that I upgrade to the latest Dell. I was shocked to hear the opposite from the Apple salesman.

-SD

---

https://www.kickstarter.com/...bike-for-the-new-era

The forum does tend to skew reality at times, I'd bet that there are more people that buy triathlon bikes without ever reading exactly how they should do it here.[/quote]People may not read this forum, but I'd be willing to bet that most people will ask someone who's been influenced by aerodynamic claims what their opinion is!



It's all about cost to benefit ratio. If people don't see te benefit of getting something more expensive then they won't. There's not really any clear info out here that says what benefit I'd get by changing from a Planet X frame to a Felt or any other brand. When TT bike shopping, I thought it was worth saving for zipps as I'd seen data that said they were better. I couldn't see any frame data, so I assumed minimal differences and went for a cheap one.

Surely you've heard that the Lotus is fast, why not buy one of those? Were you committed to a new bike? How about Walser? Do you not believe Felt's claims? How about Cervelo, Trek, or Specialized? I'll grant you that the difference in these frames may be small, but it is real. Once the investment is made for a new bike, why not buy the fastest one or the one you believe to be the fastest? You did so for the Zipp wheels.

Gaining a simple understanding of WHY a bike is fast, you can quickly narrow your search to companies that obviously follow the easy guidelines. You can still make a pretty fast frame without CFD or a wind tunnel, but ignoring basic properties of aerodynamics are often blatant by these open mold frame designs, things like CONCAVE leading edges on a downtube or the blunt (or flat) trailing surface on seat tubes show an obvious lack of understanding of how air moves over a moving bicycle.

Still, at the end it comes down to clever marketing of the collected data. That has lead to our claim of the fastest UCI legal bike available, and perhaps has lead a few others to the same conclusion. Can you name the companies that boast this claim? If you can't narrow your search to just one brand, choose from the ones that have the data to support their claim, then just buy the bike that suits you in all of the other factors consumers consider when making a purchase: color, fit, price, dealer interaction, availability, homage to professional on same brand, willingness to respond to ST forum chatter...

-SD

---

https://www.kickstarter.com/...bike-for-the-new-era

Surely you've heard that the Lotus is fast, why not buy one of those? Were you committed to a new bike? How about Walser? Do you not believe Felt's claims? How about Cervelo, Trek, or Specialized? I'll grant you that the difference in these frames may be small, but it is real. Once the investment is made for a new bike, why not buy the fastest one or the one you believe to be the fastest? You did so for the Zipp wheels.[/quote]I thought (not sure how correctly) that the rules of my governing body would have banned the lotus. At the time of purchase, I hadn't spent quite so long looking into all the info which I now know and so went for the easily available data and had a limited budget.

My thinking at the time went - I buy those wheels, I will save this much time based on easily accessible data by zipp which is backed up by the independent results of the tour wheel tests. I had a bit of a look for frame data, but couldn't find any. I then heard it said that the frame won't make that much difference so went for one that I knew was reliable and cheap (+ their adjustable bars are great!).

For the average person who doesn't have a degree in aerodynamics, these are minor details. If customers told you that they thought that a non-horizontal bent top tube looked faster, would you make the top tube bent or tell them that they were wrong and make it horizontal? I'm guessing this is why people are putting brakes in arse awkward places, because the customer buys a product that has bold aerodynamic statements and not just trailing edges that are slightly more optimised than the competition. (PS. who the heck makes a concave downtube!?!)

Not just the fastest UCI bike, but, drum roll:
http://www.thefastestbikeintheworld.com/

If I buy kit and the data isn't sufficient to fill me with confidence (detailed data from company and backed up by one independent test), I'll actually go with forum participation; before buying Zipps, I read every post that JoshatZipp made on this forum!

ha, no uci events but if the bike had to be redesigned with perhaps a slower geometry, I'd want to buy the faster uci illegal version. Even if the dif is only 1 second an hour why pay for something slower?

The bikes would have to be stock, except for the wheels, and all bikes would be tested with the same wheelset (say Zipp 606 just because it is so common).

There isn't an out-of-the-box bike faster than the B12 for the money, including current UCI-illegal models. You've made a sound choice.