OK now that is the bike that I want.

Aero and light - check
Aero handlebars - check
Killer black paint scheme - check
HED wheels - check
option for a more forward post - check

EDIT: it needs a killer black carbon BERK saddle and black bar tape.

Put on some aero brakes and away we go.

ahhhh. shit.

it needs a killer black carbon BERK saddle and black bar tape.

I like the white saddle and bar tape.

Love the black with the white logos.

I cycled with Phil White a few weeks ago and Phil was riding a very stealth looking black-on-black S5 that was a one-off they made.

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

"Cervelo claims a 4.4 watts savings from the bars alone, and 21.3 watts on the complete bike compared to the previous S5VWD."

21.3 watts over the previous S5? Is that even possible? I assume that most of that is coming from the wheels, going from Mavic Cosmics (or whatever they came with) to the He'd wheels?

FLECK you have to have your secret spy came going. If you have seen my bikes you will know I am more black than white but a little white is alright. I hate white bar tape however.

Gotta be the wheels....and at yaw, haha.

---

---

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 will take 21.3 on a complete bike set up the way they have it built and will raise them some aero brakes and some other aero goodies I would do.

I like the aero handlebars with the design helping to shield the front of the stem. I was wondering before why someone didn't design something like this (3T, Zipp, Enve). Guess Cervelo got on it.

I am also curious if Cervelo will release some wind tunnel data. Would be interesting to see how fast they tested the Felt AR (if they tested it).

Any weight loss?

---

Mike

From the Cervelo Forum:

---

Suffer Well.

Have you tested Dura Ace brakes in the tunnel? I'd guess that they did, and would have probably put a tri-rig on it had they determined that it was that much better.

I'm not sure they would spec it with Tri-Rig. In honesty, it is still a business so they have to penny pinch in places. Not to mention potential liability issues. Better to use a product from a large company like Shimano than source "boutique" parts from a business being run out of a home.

I kind of get that, but this is their flagship model so I doubt pinching pennies is a problem on this bike.

It's still a road bike, which means a highly functioning brake is of foremost concern. I have the tririg omega and love it for my TT bike, but still prefer a traditional brake for feel and stopping power on the roadie.

---

-Stephen in Arkansas

I couldn't agree more, I love my ultegra 6800 brakes and certainly wouldn't trade em out to save a watt or two on my road bike.

TriRig up front and the EE on the rear. This set up is amazing.

EE? I guess I'm behind...

---

-Stephen in Arkansas

Will the Seatpost be reversible like the old Soloist? Wondering if it'll be more "forward" than the front-position on the current S5 VWD/Team? Curious to see how "stiff" this bike will be as well. The current S5 is plenty fast/aero, but pretty damn stiff! Awesome paint scheme. I might upgrade just for that!

No it is not reversible, and neither was the old soloist. The head of the post was reversible on the soloist, this has no head.

---

---

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

http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...h_string=ee;#5169978

http://weightweenies.starbike.com/...+brake&start=105

Good threads on the EE brakes.

What about the S5 seatpost w/ two positions? Will that fit in it? Or will they offer one?

---

-Stephen in Arkansas

I thought that they had noe but bumped the STA up by about 1.5 degrees.

Shockily resembles what I am trying to do with my S5 vwd :) Except mine has Tri rig brakes and stem. Yay watts. Paint is sick though!

Curious how the handlebar compares to the vuka Sprint. I have and love the bar, but this one looks much deeper. Curious how it feels on the tops. As much as I like the Sprint, I wish it had a grippy matte finish instead of gloss.

Here's the dual position seatpost on the current S5 that I've been told fits the existing S2/S3. I would be curious to know if it will also fit the new S5.

Edit: I don't know why I want to know....I won't be spending five figures on a bike anytime soon...

---

-Stephen in Arkansas

But the TriRig stem and brakes on this with a few other little goodies and you have a super sick build. Too bad cervelo did not give the option of aero extensions on this with a few holes on each side and mounting options. Could have been a great option.

Damon - If you are building an new aero drop bar is there a reason you did not make it able to accept aerobar extensions? I would think that it would have been easy to do at the time of design to put two holes on each side and allow the use of aero extensions 22.2mm on the underside if desired and nothing on top as it is a fairly large platform or allow the use of armrests on the top if you wanted.

ITU racers would love to have the extensions on time but not armrests on top but the rest of us (OK ME!) would love to have the option to add another position for Fondo's / long rides or the occasional triathlon. With Di2 and Sram wireless, a multi fuctional bike is very easy to set up. Having a two position post as well opens up the market for this bike as well.

do you have any experience with ciamillo gravitas?

Whoa! Just googled those (as I'd never heard of them) and they come in at $875/caliper?!?!

---

-Stephen in Arkansas

Haha, no way.

i didnt realise they are that cheap either!...kind of makes them the poor mans fibula brakes

why in the world are you guys going on about brake calipers anyway? haha

---

---

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

http://www.bikerumor.com/...ated-rca/#more-84774

---

Suffer Well.

I was all ready to get an S3. I might have to wait and see if this handles like a road-worthy bike.
Anyone know frame or bike weight?

The number that one participant from Eurobike stated was given by the reps was 960 grams for a 56 cm frame (with all hardware included).

The frameset isn't going to be cheap

Compared to the old S5 frame, how much faster is the new one?

Don't know yet, that data will come soon.

It is 35% stiffer in the headtube and 17% stiffer in the fork, though.

All I keep thinking is that I want that bar on my SLC-SL...

Why would it handle different than an S3, or an R3 or R5 for that matter? All the Cervelo road bikes have the exact same geometry.

---

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

Current S5 rides like poo.

Huh? In what way?

---

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

I have not ridden the S5 to any extensive level to be able to formulate an opinion, but there is a reason it is regularly passed by top riders in place of the s3 on a regular basis. For me 5500 for an mechanical ultegra is just way too much when you can get an S3 for half that price.

You can always spot the triathlete at a road race because they are riding an S5, go for an early solo attempt, get reeled in after they are left to marinade for a while, and are then quickly out the back. After the race they will blame their Gear selection and will then buy the new S5 in hopes of gaining those precious few watts advantage.

All other Cervelo bikes have the same geometry. The BikeRumor article says they dropped stack on this one by 2 cm.

Prices were in the Bike Rumor article

---

Suffer Well.

Or they go early and win it like my buddy Nate Sheetz, pictured cornering on an S5 somehow in a P12 crit.

Of course he is no triathlete.

---

---

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

25mm tires


I tend to make mine stick.

---

Eric Reid AeroFit | Instagram Portfolio
Aerodynamic Retul Bike Fitting

“You are experiencing the criminal coverup of a foreign backed fascist hostile takeover of a mafia shakedown of an authoritarian religious slow motion coup. Persuade people to vote for Democracy.”

fixed it for you

Classic ST.

I think the best value is the Ultegra package. You get HED wheels ($1900), Cervelo aero drop ($400), Frame, fork and post ($4500) and the rest of the components.

I would buy the Ultegra for $5500 and keep the wheels, bars, frame (headset), forks and post and just sell off everything else. Slap on my Omega's, my RED (for now), aero cranks and you would have a very nice bike.

This approach to me seems a lot better than spending $4500 on just the frame, forks and post.

I would agree that if the Ultegra bike comes with those bars and deep HED wheels it is a steal.

I'll bet the Ultegra verison comes with HED Ardennes and and more standard drop bars. But even with those components it is a good deal vs the frameset.

But I'd have a hard time justifying the premium of any of them over a S3. The S5 frameset costs twice that of a S3 frameset

---

Suffer Well.

Don't forget the S2 tested the same aero-wise and weighs the same as the S3.

So really you should buy the s2 for EVEN LESS

---

---

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 agree this bike is a grand slam. This is exactly what I thought the S5 should have been last time. This version is much more well thought out. I would prefer Zipp wheels, but that's an easy change.

...along with the psychological problem of perceiving that the "filled in" seat tube makes the rear "harsh".

---

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

I never gave an opinion, in fact from the eyeball test i like the bike, a lot! I am just interested to know why i do not see them ridden that often in road races and by Garmin.

I believe that only the Dura Ace bikes come with HED wheels.

It also states that all 3 spec'd levels will come with cervelo drop bar. Which I kind of want for my SLC-SL I'm building.

If this is correct then odds on for most S5s promenading with large stacks of unslightly and unaerodynamic spacers.

Race bikes are too expensive these days. $10K for a bike is absurd. Adjusted for inflation, this bike is over twice as expensive as the handmade Tomassini with Dura Ace I used to race back in the early ninties.

In general, I think top-end carbon is outrageously overpriced. This is a mass produced, Asian subcontractor-produced carbon frame, in what way is it possibly worth $4,500? You can get a custom made and finished Ti or stainless frame for that price. In a day where you can get a nice sub 900g unbranded frame for less than $500 (from Velobuild, for example), this type of pricing for mass produced carbon is looking increasingly ridiculous. The material simply isn't exotic any more.

With a Cervelo you aren't paying for the material, you are paying for the aerodynamic shape. A custom made ti bike would be worse in every way =)

---

---

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

Aero frames are likely the least effective cost / watt saved option in cycling. You're better off with $50 shoe covers. The is especially true in road frames. The proported aero benefit of a frame like the S5 vs a round tube road frame is completely negligible, especially in a crit / sportif / group ride that 99.9% of potential buyers are going to be using this for. Even Cervelo's "lab tested" benefits are ridiculously small and completely meaningless if you're in a pack (which most people buying this will be). Don't believe the hype, this is snake oil / conspicuous consumption. I don't fault people who want to buy the S5, there are far, far worse ways to blow money. I also own a Scott Foil and several sets of deep section wheels so I'm just as guilty as the next man. But let's be clear about what we're all paying for here: pride of ownership.

Hiro have you ever been in a bike race, in a pack, where it was hard to keep up?

Do you know WHY it was hard to keep up? Either wind resistance, or gravity.

Less wind resistance is good.

As rare as frame aerodynamics may make a difference in your road racing, it is more likely they will make a difference than the grams of weight or millimeter geometry adjustments from custom frames will.

So if you want to think of frame aerodynamics as stupid to worry about, and I think that is only half crazy, you can. But worrying about the tiny difference in geometry, weight, and stiffness is *even stupider*

I race bikes, I understand aerodynamics, I've done the math, and I've definitely had at least one cat 3 podium that would not have happened if I had been on a custom TI bike =)

Of course I also didn't pay anywhere near $4,000 for my s5.

Buy the S2, in the winter when it is on sale. Great value!

---

---

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

If they dropped stack by 2cm, they turned it into a pretty aggressive bike in terms of front end height.

At least they have put a nice and low stack headset top cap on this road bike. My TT bike from Cervelo came with a cone spacer that resembled a wizard's hat, go figure.

2 cm is nowhere close to "aggressive". That just brings them back to "middle of the road", back to where they were before the geometry merge with RS. The Trek H1 is an additional 2 cm lower, still. See, for example:
http://djconnel.blogspot.com/2014/08/stack-and-reach-of-trek-madone-domane.html

mmmm...those look like A9 D3s...definitely classing up the joint ;-)

---

Carl Matson

Trek is 53.1 for a 54cm H1- If -2cm is correct, the new S5 would be 53.5cm stack for a 54cm.
I call that aggressive (since I call an H1 "pro aggressive").
Specialized Tarmac is 54cm stack in a 54cm- it is also aggressive.
I don't know where your definition of aggressive comes from. But hats off to you if ride an H1 with the stem slammed.
Most don't- I see so many Trek Madone H1 bikes with 4cm of spacers that it makes my stomach turn.
I feel bad for the riders who ride them and the shops who sold them. It doesn't have to be like that.

As I've been exposed to "stories" from the peloton in regards to equipment selection, I've come to the conclusion that pro riders are quite an odd bunch when it comes to equipment. Seriously.

---

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

I remember a photo from Paris-Roubaix where a rider had a piece of wooden 2x4 jammed under his saddle for some reason. For Paris-Roubaix

You didn't look at my reference. The stack difference is much more than 2 cm, Cervelo vs Trek H1. Cervelo is basically Trek H2:

Because bike handling, performance, and stiffness is based on more than just geometry.

Never forgot the JoshP post, where pros could no longer identify the stiffness of wheels/frames, when they couldn't see them =)

---

---

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

Might check your data.
According to Trek 54cm H1 is 53.1
According to Cervelo S5 is 55.5

There...fixed that for you ;-)

---

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

 

>I remember a photo from Paris-Roubaix where a rider had a piece of wooden 2x4 jammed under his saddle for some reason. For Paris-Roubaix

Had to be a jury-rigged fix for a slipping seat post or broken clamp. Not sure why they didn't just get a backup bike, but maybe it was a poor team, or something.

That's right...and the only variable which was perceivable reliably as "something is different" (attributed to "this must be the X bike, or X wheel") was tire pressure.

On top of that, the ONLY bike feature that was able to be reliably discerned from the power vs. speed data was aerodynamic drag. The engineers could always point out which setups where more aero from the data. Other things (i.e. frame stiffness, wheel stiffness, etc.)?...not at all.

---

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

The bike "size" doesn't matter. Compare stack and reach. "Size" is related to seat tube length, if anything, but there's no real standard.

http://www.bikeradar.com/...ched-for-2015-42254/

---

Suffer Well.

21 watt savings!*




*at 200mph

---

---------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.onelesshiker.com
http://www.twitch.tv/1horsepower

This article gives a breakdown of where the savings come from:
http://www.bikerumor.com/...s5-plus-updated-rca/

and they are at 30mph:

1% � seatpost
2% � rear brake
3% � front break
5% � rear wheel
9% � drivetrain
9% � bottle
9% � fork
16% � frame
16% � front wheel
30% � handlebar

---

---

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

Yeah -- 51% is from bars and wheels, which can apply to any bike, including the old S5.

right, and 9% is drivetrain

so only 9 watts improvement over the old S5

still amazeballs

---

---

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

Cervelo said old S5 = P4 (with stack normalised) and Tri mag testing vs Plasma 3 backed up that S5 super quick
Given that there is a 3w difference between P4 and P5 (at 30mph using Mavic Kona yaw distribution [=windy]) - should Cervelo just ditch the P5 and have S5R and S5TT geometries?

And I'm very pleased about the 2cm stack reduction - it makes the 58 pretty much like a custom frame for me :-)

The writing is unclear, but it seems those numbers are just the total drag of each part (presumably on an S5). It says nothing about where the savings of 21.3 watts come from outside of the 4.4 watts on the handlebars. The handlebars account for 20% of the of 21 watts. I would guess much of the rest comes from the wheels. Would be nice to see an actual breakdown of the frame/fork. Nonetheless, that breakdown is very interesting and should help other manufacturers calculate where to put their efforts.

Also, I wonder if the lower headtube accounts for much of the change (in new vs. old s5). It really seems like a much better race bike (stiffer in all areas, and much better looking) but with marginal gains in aero. Tip of the hat to Cervelo for creating a faster, more complete bike even if they were a bit loose with their numbers.

That can't be total drag: bars aren't more than frame.

In any case, you can't really separate drag experimentally, since everything interacts with everything else. You can separate sources of advantage, though, to some degree.

>That can't be total drag: bars aren't more than frame.

Why not? It's plausible to me that round bars having more drag than a slippery frame.


>In any case, you can't really separate drag experimentally, since everything interacts with everything else

They did it in CFD, not the wind tunnel.

That's not the drag SAVINGS. That's the drag contribution of each component to the total drag of the bike. They used that to prioritize where they would invest their time and resources for the update. The handlebar is the biggest culprit so that was a priority to improve.

think about the position/location of the bars and how much of their total area is directly exposed to drag, especially with standard round tubes - ~44cm wide with big loops hanging off either side. The frame is mostly hiding behind the front wheel and head tube and has an extremely think profile compared to the bars riding down the road like a car with the doors wide open.

Nope! Read the last few paragraphs, photo is in the gallery

http://www.cyclingnews.com/...-in-to-paris-roubaix

 

>Nope! Read the last few paragraphs, photo is in the gallery

Hmm. OK. I got nothing.

Typical CdA for the older S5 was around 580 cm-squared (Bicycling Magazine: 600 "grams"). For the handlebars, it's a lateral cylinder, which is around 40 cm multiplied by 2.6 cm = approximately 100 cm-squared, with Cd close to 1 for a cylinder hit at normal angle, plus more for the drops, but not counting where the hands are. Wind hitting the drops isn't at normal incidence, so Cd will be a bit lower. Still, it's not too far off from what you stated.

The challenge is the rider drafts behind the bars, to the incremental cost of aerobars is less than this. For example, if the wind hits the bars then is accelerated to v (bike speed), but only decelerates to 70% of v by the time hit hits the rider, then that's only half the kinetic energy (and half the drag) of that same air hitting the rider than would have been had the bars not been there. So that would halve the incremental effect of bars when a rider is present. I realize this is an insanely simplified view of wind resistance, but the effect is still real.

Where are you getting prices from? It seems like these bikes are not showing in the cervelo site

9w faster than the S5~P4 which is ~3w from the P5-6 so 6w faster? Something seems off.

I'd totally kill for a P5/p6 with a 2cm reduction in stack.

There are a lot of unknowns in there (for us on the outside) so it doesn't really stack up to compute a 6w advantage. However - it does imply that things are getting close enough that it would be very interesting to see evidence the trickery of the P5-Six is actually necessary.

What is the margin for error in these kinds of reports? I seem to remember that 5-6 aero watts was the common error estimate.

Pretty big margin of error when part of it is hearsay "S5 roughly equal to P4 when bar height the same" is not a basis for detailed analysis.
It's just interesting when the old S5 was so good and they're stating significant improvements to frameset.

http://biketechreview.com/performance/testing/463-wind-tunnel-uncertainty


Shows Texas to have repeatability ~1.5w @50kph

no idea what the 'margin of error is'..all i know is that i've had wood for two days now ever since clicking on the homepage review of the new S5.
Ya think its normal ..or at least OK...for a grown man (with a hottie for a wife incidently) to be this aroused by a freakin bike?!!?::))

Hope to be riding the new S5 next summer! BooYA!!




.

BikeRadar reports the new S5 saves "21.3 watts at 40 kph". If the watt savings were reported for the frame @ 40 kph, and the handlebars were reported to save 4.4 watts, then perhaps the bar savings were also at 40 kph, which then scales to 7.7 watts @ 30 mph, which compares better with Zipp's claim of 6.4 watts at 30 mph.

It wouldn't make sense Cervelo would do a bar which wasn't as good as Zipps.

Just on my way back from Euro bike, have time for a few replies.

- 25C front and rear (the biggest 25C we measured was 28.67 mm)
- Completely new fork, similar but not the same as the S3's
- I like the paint too. :-)

Cheers,

---

Damon Rinard
Engineering Manager,
CSG Road Engineering Department
Cannondale & GT Bicycles
(ex-Cervelo, ex-Trek, ex-Velomax, ex-Kestrel)

Hi Fleck,

yeah, Phil's custom painted S5 VWD is verrrry niiiice. :-)

Cheers,

---

Damon Rinard
Engineering Manager,
CSG Road Engineering Department
Cannondale & GT Bicycles
(ex-Cervelo, ex-Trek, ex-Velomax, ex-Kestrel)

Hi burning,

Correct, the 21.3 Watt savings is for the new complete S5 versus the old complete S5. Frameset is about the same (no small feat given we widened a bunch of tubes to increase stiffness), with the bar and wheels making the difference.

Cheers,

---

Damon Rinard
Engineering Manager,
CSG Road Engineering Department
Cannondale & GT Bicycles
(ex-Cervelo, ex-Trek, ex-Velomax, ex-Kestrel)

Frame is the same weight as the S5 VWD. We weighed one at 1065 grams (size 56cm, with paint & small parts).

---

Damon Rinard
Engineering Manager,
CSG Road Engineering Department
Cannondale & GT Bicycles
(ex-Cervelo, ex-Trek, ex-Velomax, ex-Kestrel)

Hi tri,

The post isn't reversible, but the shaft is the same shape as the old S5 (and new S3 and new S2), so now all current S-series can swap posts - including the 2-position post. All posts are available after market, but if you know someone with one they might swap you for your single-position post.

Cheers,

---

Damon Rinard
Engineering Manager,
CSG Road Engineering Department
Cannondale & GT Bicycles
(ex-Cervelo, ex-Trek, ex-Velomax, ex-Kestrel)

Damon,
Are headtube sizes (and stack) lower than current S5 as stated on some websites?
Pictured bike does not look low stack though I do not know what size it is.
I am hoping not-

Hi Orbilius,

As you can imagine, we benchmarked a bunch of aero road bars (including that one) and ours was the fastest.

I also have a Vuka Sprint and I like it a lot, it's a great bar.

Cheers,

---

Damon Rinard
Engineering Manager,
CSG Road Engineering Department
Cannondale & GT Bicycles
(ex-Cervelo, ex-Trek, ex-Velomax, ex-Kestrel)

Hi BMANX,

We considered clip ons, but the mission for this bar was pure road. Adding holes subtracts strength, which requires reinforcements, which add more weight back again...

I've seen other aero drap bars that *are* clip-on compatible though. They'd fit your request perfectly I'd think.

Cheers,

---

Damon Rinard
Engineering Manager,
CSG Road Engineering Department
Cannondale & GT Bicycles
(ex-Cervelo, ex-Trek, ex-Velomax, ex-Kestrel)

Hi just,

Might be a typo or mis-communication there; we've weighed one at 1065 grams. Easy to get confused though, we also introduced the new Rca with lots of numbers as well.

Cheers,

---

Damon Rinard
Engineering Manager,
CSG Road Engineering Department
Cannondale & GT Bicycles
(ex-Cervelo, ex-Trek, ex-Velomax, ex-Kestrel)

Equal.

---

Damon Rinard
Engineering Manager,
CSG Road Engineering Department
Cannondale & GT Bicycles
(ex-Cervelo, ex-Trek, ex-Velomax, ex-Kestrel)

Correct. And you can get the bar aftermarket, so if you want one for your SLC-SL, go for it! :-)

Cheers,

---

Damon Rinard
Engineering Manager,
CSG Road Engineering Department
Cannondale & GT Bicycles
(ex-Cervelo, ex-Trek, ex-Velomax, ex-Kestrel)

Hi dj,

The frame stack is lower by between ~1 cm (size 48) to ~2 cm (size 61). Size 56 is ~1.5 cm lower stack. (I'm not in the office right now, so these numbers are from memory, but they're closer than the other number.)

The ~22 mm quoted is the difference in head tube length. Unfortunately, that crept into our presentation, even though the fork lengths are 6 mm different, which makes differences in HT lengths much less useful.

Cheers,

---

Damon Rinard
Engineering Manager,
CSG Road Engineering Department
Cannondale & GT Bicycles
(ex-Cervelo, ex-Trek, ex-Velomax, ex-Kestrel)

Where's the "like" button when you need it.

---

Damon Rinard
Engineering Manager,
CSG Road Engineering Department
Cannondale & GT Bicycles
(ex-Cervelo, ex-Trek, ex-Velomax, ex-Kestrel)

I loved that post! Can you find a link?

---

Damon Rinard
Engineering Manager,
CSG Road Engineering Department
Cannondale & GT Bicycles
(ex-Cervelo, ex-Trek, ex-Velomax, ex-Kestrel)

Hi dj,

Yes, exactly.

We've been thinking of ways to make stack & reach more intuitive. Turns out, by coincidence, the stack of a typical classic lugged steel frame is about the same as it's centre-to-centre seat tube length. Usually. Might help people get a "feel" for stack at least. It's still not perfect though.

Cheers,

---

Damon Rinard
Engineering Manager,
CSG Road Engineering Department
Cannondale & GT Bicycles
(ex-Cervelo, ex-Trek, ex-Velomax, ex-Kestrel)

So the frame is stiffer, takes bigger tires, but equally aero to the current S5. So the 21.3 watt improvement is entirely due to handlebars and wheels?

---

Suffer Well.

Hi great,

21.3 Watts savings*

*at 40 km/h

Fixed it for you.

Cheers,

---

Damon Rinard
Engineering Manager,
CSG Road Engineering Department
Cannondale & GT Bicycles
(ex-Cervelo, ex-Trek, ex-Velomax, ex-Kestrel)

Hi Nigel, Yes, it's not easy to get the meaning, but you nailed it. And the numbers are from an S5 with rider and normal drop bars.



Good thinking, but we normalize Foam Dave's position, so in this case a rider who wants to go lower might expect another incremental improvement.



Very good summary. Thanks for the compliments, and I'll pass them along to the design team.

Cheers,

---

Damon Rinard
Engineering Manager,
CSG Road Engineering Department
Cannondale & GT Bicycles
(ex-Cervelo, ex-Trek, ex-Velomax, ex-Kestrel)

Hi dj,

We've lumped brake levers in with the bars. I'm wishing now we'd labelled it that way, but we'd been so used to it ourselves we didn't notice.

And the CFD analysis includes the rider (so as you said, hands cover some of the drops).

Cheers,

---

Damon Rinard
Engineering Manager,
CSG Road Engineering Department
Cannondale & GT Bicycles
(ex-Cervelo, ex-Trek, ex-Velomax, ex-Kestrel)

Thanks for making that comparison dj. It matches our test results.

Cheers,

---

Damon Rinard
Engineering Manager,
CSG Road Engineering Department
Cannondale & GT Bicycles
(ex-Cervelo, ex-Trek, ex-Velomax, ex-Kestrel)

Hi bootsie,

Stack is lower, but not as much as has been previously stated. See my earlier post for my best memory, but when the bike is available (planned for October) we'll put the web page up, including the geometry chart with all the real dimensions.

Cheers,

---

Damon Rinard
Engineering Manager,
CSG Road Engineering Department
Cannondale & GT Bicycles
(ex-Cervelo, ex-Trek, ex-Velomax, ex-Kestrel)

Hi jmh,

Exactly.

Cheers,

---

Damon Rinard
Engineering Manager,
CSG Road Engineering Department
Cannondale & GT Bicycles
(ex-Cervelo, ex-Trek, ex-Velomax, ex-Kestrel)

Damon. Thanks for the responses. Much appreciated.

---

Suffer Well.

Is there any improvement in ride compliance or rear end stiffness? Trying to figure out upgrading from a current S5 with aero drop bars is worth it.

Also is there anyway to mount a Garmin to the front of the bars, similar to an out front mount?

Thanks for the clarification about stack. Out of interest, is this change due to Cervelo deciding that their previous stack philosophy for the S series was wrong, or that the customer is wrong but Cervelo has decided to give them what they have been asking for anyway?* Further, if the new geometry results in an extra 1.5 cm of spacers below the stem how much aero cost is associated with that? How can that cost be minimized? Might seem like aero nitpicking but that's what this bike is all about.

*It seems to me that this is all somehow related to the lost art of riding in the drops. This leads me to another question I've been pondering for a while. Used to be that road bars were fairly high and pros would ride in the drops with a good bend at the elbow in order to get low. Now with this fashion for slammed stems you see many road pros riding in the drops with their arms totally straight. In other words their hands are lower but the position of their body and heads maybe not. Based on frontal area seems the former would be more aero but has anyone tested this - same body position for different bar heights/elbow bends? Something for Mark Cote and the #aeroiseverything guys?

For visibility I prefer my Garmin out in front but FWIW according to this there's even an aero benefit of putting the Garmin on the stem with the new Cervelo road bars.

Damon, how much "slower," recognizing it's all relative, would my '09 S2 with the new aero bar be compared to the new S5? Also, when is Cervelo going to come out with a cyclocross bike?

New geo chart http://brimages.bikeboardmedia.netdna-cdn.com/...geometry-600x492.jpg

Thanks, Damon, for the great info! I keep waiting for Cervelo to come out with a version of your cantilever bike.

Question: when stack is reduced, is that along a 73 degree angle, equivalent to spacer differences? This would be my guess, because then existing customers can use the same size frame with a spacer stack difference. This will increase reach, the ratio the cotangent of 73 degrees, or 30.6%. Alternatively, you could keep reach constant. This would shift the bars down, but not forward. Restoring geometry would then require a combination of spacers, stem flip, and stem length change. Lowering the bars typically requires a reach reduction, not increase, for a given rider with a given pack position, so I'm guessing the fixed stack approach may be preferred, but the increased reach approach was taken for pragmatic reasons. Just a guess.

I wonder how much of the head tube stiffness increase will be lost by people who now have to run 1 to 2cm more spacers =)

---

---

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

Or how much will be gained by those who can now upsize to next frame, gain longer reach, and run a shorter stem. Or swap a -17 deg for a -10 deg or -6 deg.

Based on this: http://brimages.bikeboardmedia.netdna-cdn.com/...geometry-600x492.jpg
It looks like the bikes run pretty small. Standover is low.
Do you know seat tube length center to top?
(Edited- just realized there is no seat collar)
Many riders may be able to size up on this bike if they need more stack?

certainly if Ryder Hesjdal sized up that would help. But, I think most of the people who think they need super low stack also think the long stems are cool

anyway, no cervelo for ryder next year!

---

---

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

Hi denali,

From memory, about 6 Watts (all components the same, including bars and wheels).

Cyclocross! Yeah, we want one. But every year it's been on the agenda, it gets bumped by a new P4, a new S5, a new P5, a new P3, a new P2, a new RCA, etc.

We've finally admitted we're probably not ever(?) going to make one.

Cheers,

---

Damon Rinard
Engineering Manager,
CSG Road Engineering Department
Cannondale & GT Bicycles
(ex-Cervelo, ex-Trek, ex-Velomax, ex-Kestrel)

Hi Duncan,

Great questions and it's clear to me you understand the aero effects very well. Yes, we're simply giving a centimeter and a bit to those who insist on low bars. Per WT testing, 40 mm of spacers is worth about 7 grams at 30.0 mph, so I'm not too worried about this smaller difference.

I've never gotten around to photoshopping e.g. Ryder and Merckx's positions, scaled and in transparent overlay. I suspect they'd demonstrate when you explained: same body angles, but modern pros' hands are on the hoods, not the hooks.

We measured aero drag with hands in various positions in the wind tunnel with Fabian Cancellara. For him, the drag was lowest with forearms level, which on his Cervelo, was hands on the hoods, not drops. Even with him, I suspect if we'd frozen his body angles and replaced his frame with a bigger size (or two) so his hands were in the drops, drag might have decreased - but we've not gotten around to testing that yet. For me, since different riders have different bar heights, "hoods" or "drops" isn't the parameter of interest, but maybe something like "forearm angle + degree of bar shielding," or something like that.

Cheers,

---

Damon Rinard
Engineering Manager,
CSG Road Engineering Department
Cannondale & GT Bicycles
(ex-Cervelo, ex-Trek, ex-Velomax, ex-Kestrel)

Hi Jack,

No worries, with 35%(!) more torsional stiffness there's plenty to spare.

Cheers,

---

Damon Rinard
Engineering Manager,
CSG Road Engineering Department
Cannondale & GT Bicycles
(ex-Cervelo, ex-Trek, ex-Velomax, ex-Kestrel)

Bummer about the 'cross bike but I can see how it's not really your thing, or at lower priority. Having said that, I think there'd be huge demand for an R3 tweaked as an "adventure" bike. Kinda like the "mud" R3 but maybe blowing out the tire clearance to 35.

Btw, very happy owner of a P5 and s2. I lust after the new S5 but will probably have to settle for just upgrading to the new aerobar. There some races that I want to do next year that will require a 'cross bike and can't afford 2 new bikes unless I win Powerball!

Damon:

I don't know about Merckx, but this Coppi - Contador comparison got a lot of attention:
http://ruedatropical.com/...m-coppi-to-contador/

I did an animated GIF overlay of Anquetil and Tony Martin:
http://djconnel.blogspot.com/...anquetil-versus.html

Positions haven't rely changed much. Arm angles perhaps.

I always thought Contador's position looked exemplary. He looks relaxed yet his back is in a good place. He's the antithesis if Andy Schleck.

I ride 8cm drop on my road bike. I used to ride more but then I had to rotate my bars to raise the hoods. Additionally I'd then ride on what would be the ramps on an older bike instead of the hoods. 3dbikefit talked some spence into me.

That said all of this talk about spacers isn't quite fair, since going from a -17 to -6 deg stem may involve losing spacers for the same bar height with shorter stack. If I was getting custom geometry Id want a 9-10 cm stem and probably 0-6 deg, not 12-13 or -17.

I did fitting diagrams here:
http://djconnel.blogspot.com/...cervelo-demo-r5.html

You can either start with desired x,y and project back to the frame, or project from the frame and try to get close to x,y.

I'm no fitting expert but it seems to me you want to be able to ride in the drops for a more aggressive position, or hoods for less aggressive, in each case with bent elbows without pivoting shoulders forward. When lowering the bars means you lose the drops or need to strain shoulders or overextend arms you're no longer improving back position, just straining. 3d bike fit also likes to emphasize rotating pelvis forward and maintaining a straight back. I really don't see many pros with straight backs so I wonder about that one, but everything else seems consistent with what the best riders do.

Hi Damon,

Out of curiosity, why is there no love for the Shimano direct mount brakes? I've zero experience of them and haven't found any decent reviews so it may just be that they're no good; either way, they just don't seem to be used by anyone except Trek. Are manufacturers avoiding them as the twin post mount is, I guess, fairly proprietary to this brake and other component manufacturers aren't using the standard, hence no one wants to commit to a frame designed for them? Do they compromise the seat stay design (I guess they need more strength to prevent flexing). I chose my NP3 because it has normal brakes, which was a big factor in my decision process, and I think it's refreshing for a company to be focussing on what's most beneficial to the end user i.e. standard brakes over compromised hidden brakes.

Whilst I'm asking... the revised colour schemes of the P3/P5 and some of the R series seems to be at odds with the 2014 bikes; can we expect updates to S2/S3 colour schemes?

Hi Jersey,

Direct mount brakes makes structural sense, but you nailed it - at this time, you're restricted to Shimano and only a few other choices. As you mentioned, clumsy hidden brakes are no fun, and simple single-hole brake mounts are more athlete-friendly all around. Free choice of any standard brake means you can choose super-aero (Magura, Tri-Rig), and maintenance is easy and clean so you always have good braking performance.

For color schemes, "I can neither confirm nor deny..." so stand by! FYI Cervelo has abandoned "model years" in the sense that we don't feel compelled to change (for example) paint schemes on existing models until something else significant has also changed. For some of the Cervelo models that changed this year, one of the changes is from 10 to 11 speed drivetrains, etc.

Cheers,

---

Damon Rinard
Engineering Manager,
CSG Road Engineering Department
Cannondale & GT Bicycles
(ex-Cervelo, ex-Trek, ex-Velomax, ex-Kestrel)

Hi dj,

Beautiful, same concept I was thinking.

Cheers,

---

Damon Rinard
Engineering Manager,
CSG Road Engineering Department
Cannondale & GT Bicycles
(ex-Cervelo, ex-Trek, ex-Velomax, ex-Kestrel)

Hi bootsie,

Yep, that links to the official geometry. We don't have a lot of S5s around the office yet (we're planning to have them in stores in October, if all goes well), so I can't easily measure a seat tube for you.

But your observation is right: the lower frame stack means standover is also lower (by different amounts in each size, so check your size). Feel free to size up if the stack and reach match your needs.

Cheers,

---

Damon Rinard
Engineering Manager,
CSG Road Engineering Department
Cannondale & GT Bicycles
(ex-Cervelo, ex-Trek, ex-Velomax, ex-Kestrel)

I plotted the geometry, comparing to Trek for reference:

If anyone wants to save about $7K, I'm selling my 2012 54' with Campy 11.

Need to go, sick of having my wife ask me if I've sold it yet. Pm me with your email addy and I'll send you pics.

Nice comparisons there. When it comes to riding in the drops I think the best in the pro peloton nowadays is Tony Martin, who achieves a position that not only looks aerodynamic but he can also hold it for significant lengths of time. If he hasn't spent time on his road bike in the windtunnel I'd be amazed. Out of the GT contenders Nibali is also very good. Both have a more classic elbow bend and from what I can tell neither have a large saddle to bar drop.

On a slight tangent, I'm not even sure it's possible to set up Merckx or Coppi positions with modern components simply because bar shape and brake/brifter hood shapes have mutated with the change in style of positions. I noticed this when I went from original shape Campy Ergos to modern Campy Ergos on Deda 215 bars. The new Ergos are much longer in the hood and simply don't work on the older bar shape. Going back further in time, drops used to be much deeper; worked then because the hoods were set pretty low, but modern brifter hoods have to be put higher up. This leads to shallower drops which then connects to the fashion for having slammed stems while keeping the drops somewhat accessible.

Did you ever get a chance to measure actual center to top of seat tube on a 56cm 2015 S5?

I can't wait to start reading some reviews of this bike. I'm interested to see how it rides compared to the current S3. I'm planning to switch from a Supersix to either a S3 or S5 this winter and still can't decide which one to go with.

Why are you switching from the supersix? That might be the best handling bike i have ever ridden and very well made.

Don't get me wrong I love my supersix. But I'm moving to a new team next year and they get killer deals on Cervelo's so I'm looking to make a switch.

Have you ridden the new S3? Might be the best all rounder out there currently. New S5, if it is as comfy as the S3, will be even better.

Because it is tied for the worst aero drag of any modern road racing frame.

---

---

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

Also may have cost Sagan stage 7 (among other kit "choices") at the TdF this year...

the tarmac was one it was tied with so at least that was a fair fight.

---

---

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'm confused now, how does the stiffness compare to the S3?

I will either be updating my old S5 for a new one, or S3.

Yes i have ridden the new s3, i liked it a lot, will probably be in the running for the next race bike (but the BMC and propel are both ahead).

That is compared to a tarmac which is not an aero stud so that's an poor illustration of a good point, in sprints at very high speeds the aero bike can possibly make a difference. I will suggest that the average cat 2/3/4 simply is not going fast enough to really notice any serious difference. I looked at 26 races this year that ended in some form of a sprint. The average distance sprint where i was in the wind was 200m and the average speed was 28mph (lots of hill finishes) comparing my CAAD10 to an s3 sprinting next to me there could be no more than 1-2mm advantage if that (which our local camera system could not tell the difference between). I am not arguing against aero road bikes, far from it as i am seriously eying an BMC/Giant/Cervelo as my next bike, i just take aero data from a manufacturer who has a vested interest in selling the aero over all mantra with several grains of salt.

Very similar. Both are stiffer than your S5, on the order of high-end road bikes now, like the R5, Giant and Tarmac.

---

Damon Rinard
Engineering Manager,
CSG Road Engineering Department
Cannondale & GT Bicycles
(ex-Cervelo, ex-Trek, ex-Velomax, ex-Kestrel)

Damon-
I am curious, do you know where my soloist team (the aluminum one) stacks up against the newer S3/S5 in terms of compliance?

post edited to fix a decimal point error!


Let's do math!
Assume .3CdA for hypothetical 75kg rider going 28mph up a 6% grade for the sprint.

This will be about a 917 watt effort.

Reduce CdA by the difference between an EVO/Tarmac and an S5, which is about .025 and we get a speed increase of .2m/s

over 200 meters at 28mph that takes 16 seconds

.2m/s and that is about 3 meters



I like this example a lot because it is very plausible - 16 seconds at 900 watts is about what we Austin cat3s would be able to do, and it also resembles a situation I had going for a short strava climb of about this grade behind my old house. I kept using our light shallow tubies, because it was uphill! Then I realized it was short enough I was averaging 27mph.

Swapped on the heavy HED Jets, cut seconds off my time, snatched the segment away from a TopLocal Cat 1

woo

---

---

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

Why a weight penalty for the aero bike. Let's assume that both are right on the 6.8kg limit. I do not think the aero bike should be penalized by weight.

One day everyone will come around to my way of thinking "AERO AND LIGHT IS RIGHT". The aero is the cake and light is the icing. Minutes with aero and seconds with weight.

The scenario put forth by mike was cat 1/2/3 racing where there would be no limit.

---

---

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

Then I would be riding my sub 6kg aero bike.

I think we can all agree we are at a point now where Aero is not a penalty in regards to weight.

Well my initial thought was the same. But then I thought that the fact that he lost by mm doesn't change the fact that he isn't on an "aero" bike that could have won him the race. Losing by 1 cm is still losing by 1 cm if you're on a slower bike. Give Sagan an S5 or Felt AR or Venge and he may have taken the win that day.

Still potentially cost him the victory, independent of whatever Matteo Trentin was riding.

Is there an extra zero in there?

---

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

I get a CdA difference of .0250 - .0275m^2 for that.

.0025 m^2 difference is only ~=2.5W

Edit: which for the conditions you described above would result in a speed difference of more like 0.21 m/s, or a 3m advantage over 200m. BTW, the 200g "penalty" for the aero bike weight only results in a .02m/s difference by my figgerin', or 1/10 the aero difference.

So, either I've stuffed this ballpark calc, or you drastically underestimated ;-)

---

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

You are right, had too many zeros in the CdA assumption.

3 meters!

I will edit my post

---

---

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 have almost 11,000 mi on my current model [2013] S5 VWD, so I think I know this frame well. I previously had a [2012] S5 Team (the one with the black/blue paint scheme) and a [2012] R5 VWD that I had set up exactly the same as the S5 Team, since they had the exact same geometry.

When I moved to the S5 VWD, I sized down from a 58cm to 56cm frame in order to get my drop where I needed it. On the 56cm S5 VWD that I currently ride, I run a -17 140mm stem. Not a lot of options there. So yeah, I like the decreased stack - I can probably now use a -6 stem.

I don't have any comfort issues with the S5. Just last weekend, I did 145mi/14Kft and felt fine afterwards. I fully subscribe to the Josh@Zipp Theory that 5psi of tire pressure change makes more difference in ride comfort than frame design.

I can't, however, get 25mm tires on my S5 VWD, at least not with wide Enve rims. So redesigning the frame to accommodate 25mm tires? Another nice upgrade for the new S5.

Other than the stack and tire clearance issues, the only other compromise I find with my S5 VWD (and this is the most significant one), is the handling/head tube stiffness. Having put a few thousand miles on the R5 VWD, I felt like the front end of that frame was stiffer and more precise than the S5's. It's not something I would notice in any situation other than high speed, particularly windy, descending. Shimmy at 50mph isn't fun and that is something that I have managed on the S5 but didn't on the R5. Then again, shimmy/instability is highly individualized and it could be something else that causes it, but I have almost 20,000mi on these frames and for me I do feel a real difference. So... if the increased torsional rigidity at the head tube is real, that would be a MAJOR improvement for me.

So...

• Lower (more appropriate) stack
• Better tire clearance
• Stiffer head tube/better handling

I already run a Vuka Sprint with my S5 VWD, so there is not *much* to be gained for me by switching to the Cervelo bar, but if the drops feel good and the top feels good, then yeah, that will be another worthwhile upgrade.

Basically, I can say that for *me* (YMMV), Cervelo has addressed each and every one of the issues that I have with my current bike, which I love. I wasn't planning on buying a new bike/frame this year, but damnit if Cervelo may have forced my hand!

---

Amateur recreational hobbyist cyclist
https://www.strava.com/athletes/337152
https://vimeo.com/user11846099

No, sorry.

But there's this: http://www.slowtwitch.com/...perception_4571.html

Cheers,

---

Damon Rinard
Engineering Manager,
CSG Road Engineering Department
Cannondale & GT Bicycles
(ex-Cervelo, ex-Trek, ex-Velomax, ex-Kestrel)

So a CAAD10/Supersix/Tarmac is giving up ~25W to an S5, and 20W to an S2/3, maybe 16-18W to an S1?

I know Mike said it doesn't make a difference to a Cat 2/3/4 but I'd disagree. For the average Cat2, just getting to the sprint is the biggest battle.

Something along those lines yes, though in the draft that difference will be less (not zero, just less) and of course the hard uphill bits it will be less.

But yeah, part of the benefit is increasing the odds that you make it to the sprint at all.

---

---

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

Not a problem. It isn't holding me back any racing. I'll work on the engine and the brain powering the tactics before I replace the bike :)

Good to hear!
"Leave no stone unturned." -anonymous
"Start with the big ones." -Damon

---

Damon Rinard
Engineering Manager,
CSG Road Engineering Department
Cannondale & GT Bicycles
(ex-Cervelo, ex-Trek, ex-Velomax, ex-Kestrel)

At first i said BS, then i thought lets put those two semesters of physics to work, i had a similar number, in fact a few cm more (around 25-30cm). I know you readjusted to 3m but even 25-30cm is quite good during a sprint. Assuming the data reported to us is correct from Cervelo that is pretty impressive and the first time i have really "seen" the difference. I might be rethinking my road bike choice after next season. Thanks for the work and this provides some good fuel for thought. The new S3 handled well and put to rest my concerns of cornering issues. Overall its not a huge difference since most races are not won by wheel lengths, but you never know when that race will happen and might as well ride the more aero bike.

Side note: Interesting you said 917 watts, almost all of those 200m sprints were around 900-950w at 150lbs.

I went looking and did not see this asked/answered. What is the drag difference between the S2/S3 and the S5, all things being equal?

---

---

Heath Dotson
HD Coaching:Website |Twitter: 140 Characters or Less|Facebook:Follow us on Facebook

Yeah about right for me too, only I weigh a lot more, I will never beat you uphill :(

lol

---

---

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

All else equal (wheels, etc.) about 4 Watts.

---

Damon Rinard
Engineering Manager,
CSG Road Engineering Department
Cannondale & GT Bicycles
(ex-Cervelo, ex-Trek, ex-Velomax, ex-Kestrel)

So all things equal I lose 4 watts on an S2 versus S5?
At 5.5 w/kg I'll take that...that's a big improvement over a Caad 10....thanks

Hi bootsie,

It's about 50 cm centre to top.

Cheers,

---

Damon Rinard
Engineering Manager,
CSG Road Engineering Department
Cannondale & GT Bicycles
(ex-Cervelo, ex-Trek, ex-Velomax, ex-Kestrel)

So an S2 with the new S5 handlebars will beat out an old S5 with normal bars. All other things equal, the S2 gives ~20W advantage over a CAAD in the wind. Who do you race for? 5.5 w/kg is a pretty monstrous number.

Perfect- a 56cm 2015 S5 should fit me well.

Damon,

So 4w of savings so how much faster would an S5 be over an S2 if you did a 40km ride averaging 30 KPH?

Maybe someone else can answer this as my math skills suck.

Most anyone can do 5.5 w/kg. It is more a matter of how long you can sustain 5.5 w/kg.

~15-20 seconds.

Are you sure that's right? 15-20" for 30 kmh and not mph?

Yes, the time saved at slower speeds are actually slightly more than at higher speeds (but less relatively, as you are on the course for a longer time).

5.5 w/kg for an 68kg (150lb) rider is 375w which is in fact a pretty normal 5-15 minute power number for cat 3/4's and closer to FTP for cat 1/2's. For a 140lb rider this is more like 350w which again is not too crazy and common at the end of races. For a top professional that is well over an 1 hour power number. I will admit that aero testing needs to be done at two speeds, one at common finishing speeds (30mph) and another at common cruising speeds (22-24mph) to understand the entire benefits of the bike. I also wish they would explain more clearly (honestly) how crosswinds affect their bikes designs. I live in Kansas and i think i never have a real tail or head wind, its always some weird strong crosswind.

For the most part Mike the CdA of bike stuff is fairly constant at different speeds. So if something reduces your CdA by .01 at 30mph, it will reduce it by .01 at 25mph too.

As for how many watts it saves, you can usually just linearly interpolate. that isn't exact of course but it is real close within 'normal' speeds.

As for crosswinds, that is exactly what yaw angles are all about:
http://www.cervelo.com/...8-7e87cddcd4f6-0.pdf

Page six shows a yaw angle sweep for the old S5 with a rider aboard. Typical cat3 fast people will 90% of the time be under 10deg yaw, but an attack into a nasty crosswind might start seeing 15-20deg

Usually the advantages of well designed aero wheels and frames is higher in a bad crosswind than in a head on or tail wind.

---

---

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

Just wondering if there is goin to be a new Vwd version?
From what you've said the new s5 is similar weight to old vwd how does stiffness of new s5 compare to vwd?
Do you know how soon bar will be available as an individual component?

I like it when people complain about a lack of information on topics that have been covered so many times. Wind tunnel speed scales to 20mph, and yaw can be read about in lots of places. Just because you haven't read it, doesn't mean its not out there.

Hi j, good questions.

The S5 replaces the S5VWD, it's at the same level. There will be no VWD version of this S5. We're just finally extending the name simplification now to the S5 as well as the R-series. No more "Team" or "VWD" versions of anything.

You're right, the new S5 frame is similar weight to the old S5VWD.

The old S5 and S5VWD have about the same BB, lateral and torsional stiffness. Just the VWD is lighter.

The bar is scheduled to be available when the bikes are, which are currently expected roughly in November or so.

Cheers,

---

Damon Rinard
Engineering Manager,
CSG Road Engineering Department
Cannondale & GT Bicycles
(ex-Cervelo, ex-Trek, ex-Velomax, ex-Kestrel)

Not sure how i missed the white paper, then again when you are doing pre-med work you tend to get a bit frazzled mentally and really don't enjoy extra work :) I had incorrectly assumed that the time savings were exponential not linear. I am slowly being convinced that the S5 might be the next purchase.

With all of this talk about aero I got a wild hair up my ass yesterday. I had a Trek TTX 9.9 frame laying around and said, "what the hell", built it up as a road bike, let's see what it can do. I rode it today and I'll be damned. That is the fastest, by far, road bike "so to speak" that I have ever ridden. Riding well below 1 hour power I shattered a 50 mile course record in 1:58, previous record of 2:02 on a road bike with 85deepwheels.I had box rim wheels on the TTX today. I feel like an idiot for not doing something like this earlier. This is amazing.

"Aero is always on!"

Your TTX is especially good as a road bike, because the stack is high and the reach short (for a TT bike).

Just be aware, if you plan to race, most TT frame are UCI illegal as road bikes: the gussets at the joints aren't allowed in road frames.

Cheers,

---

Damon Rinard
Engineering Manager,
CSG Road Engineering Department
Cannondale & GT Bicycles
(ex-Cervelo, ex-Trek, ex-Velomax, ex-Kestrel)

Thanks and I'll be damned...the fastest road bike I'd never ridden was collecting dust. Before this turn of events, I had already decided to get a good aero frame as my next road bike . There's a Cervelo dealer conveniently, 3 miles from my door. Up until now, I had decided on the S3 to be my first aero road bike. After this TTX experiment, why shouldn't I get a P2 and make it a road bike? The geometry on a 54 is quite similar to the Med. TTX. As far as the UCI regs go, (and I appreciate you letting me know) I think, although not certain, that I could race the P2 or TTX in Masters USA cycling events? Thanks again for your feedback!

Correct of course. But the question is, at how many races in North America are UCI rules followed or enforced? From what I have heard (not being a bike racer myself), very few.

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

Hi greg,

As Greg (DSW) mentioned below, in the US at least, not many races are actually run under UCI regulations.

When I moved to Canada my eyes were opened: nearly every race is technically under UCI rules, though at the club level they are somewhat overlooked - until championship time. This is more or less the case worldwide; USA is the exception.

So check with your local race representative to be sure.

---

Damon Rinard
Engineering Manager,
CSG Road Engineering Department
Cannondale & GT Bicycles
(ex-Cervelo, ex-Trek, ex-Velomax, ex-Kestrel)

Indeed. :-) (Assuming it fits.)

But why turn the question around: why not just get an S2 and make it a road bike?

Cheers,

---

Damon Rinard
Engineering Manager,
CSG Road Engineering Department
Cannondale & GT Bicycles
(ex-Cervelo, ex-Trek, ex-Velomax, ex-Kestrel)

The S2 will be better overall for a few reasons:

1. vertical dropouts
2. two bottle cages
3. likely better handling as a road bike

---

---

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

Damon, I've always been curious, have you guys isolated the penalty of having a traditional airfoil (previous S series) on the downtube with standard bottle vs. a truncated airfoil (new S series) (who are we kidding, of course you have, I just want the answer! :D )? It looks like there's decent savings putting the bottle in the lower position (14g claimed in the S5 whitepaper), but what about the above scenario? I'm considering ditching my current road and TT bikes in favor of one aero road bike and just weighing frame options and prioritizing features.

I'm only assuming that your data would suggest that the P2 would be faster than the S2 as a road bike...don't know?
Thanks for all of your feedback !

Thanks Jack!
I don't think that the dropouts would be a problem. Are you thinking pit wheel change in a race situation?
Rarely ever use 2 bottles racing...one in jersey for training would work...or under the seat.
Handling...if it's close to the TTX with road bars and road position..it would be more than adequate. This was probably my biggest reason for never trying this before...in that thinking that the handling would suck.
So riding same wattage side by side with both frames set up equal, in road position, zero wind....would the P2 be faster?

Probably P2 faster
S5 probably near the same

---

---

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

Only if you think a P2 is as fast as a P4 ;-)

---

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

Ha...you guys are too funny ! I was seriously thinking a P2 with S5 aero bars,though.

I do!

---

---

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

Why not a merida reacto? It's faster than everything but an S5 and is really quite comfy.

---

bikemessengersrepresent

That was supposed to be in Pink font right?

no the merida aero road did test well in one test.

---

---

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

Can I guess what test?

I take that back, at least, the only one I know of, it just did "ok"

---

---

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

When will the new S5 be available for order? And will it be available as a frame/fork/post/bar combo (or some version of this)?

Hi jackrobinson,

Currently planning for late October or early November. Complete bikes will be available first. Every S5 model (Dura-Ace, D-A Di2, and Ultegra) will include the handlebar. Framesets include the fork and post, but not the bar - just order it as well and you'll be set.

Cheers,

---

Damon Rinard
Engineering Manager,
CSG Road Engineering Department
Cannondale & GT Bicycles
(ex-Cervelo, ex-Trek, ex-Velomax, ex-Kestrel)

Thanks for the fast reply.

Damon - why no love for SRAM anymore? As I begin shopping for my next (aero) race bike I see that almost no manufacturers have SRAM stock on their aero bikes. Is their no love for it in the marketplace or are their technical issues with cable routing, etc preventing it?

Pretty sure that's the old reacto. Not the reacto evo used by lampre.


http://www.cervelo.com/...4-8a305634944f-2.PDF

---

bikemessengersrepresent

Hi Damon,

here in Germany they gave me week 07 as delivery date for my order. Is the early availability just for Northern America ore is there maybe a chance for me by "diggin' softly deeper" in the Cervélo Europe delivery chain to support my local dealer?

Cheers, Sausskross

---

*
___/\___/\___/\___ the s u r f b o a r d of the K u r p f a l z is the r o a d b i k e .. oSo >>

One German Cervelo reseller told me the first batch of bikes is of very limited quantity and split in tiny numbers between all the dealers in the country. Thus, if you didn't manage to snatch one, next opportunity might come only in February or perhaps even March 2015.

---

----------------------------
Need more W/CdA.

Hi sausskross,

Yes, exactly: my comments are for North America. I don't know about EU timing, but Mr. Lobber's information seems likely.

Cheers,

---

Damon Rinard
Engineering Manager,
CSG Road Engineering Department
Cannondale & GT Bicycles
(ex-Cervelo, ex-Trek, ex-Velomax, ex-Kestrel)

Ah, very good, thank you.

---

---

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

Hi Jesse,

I love my SRAM. Has worked well for me since 2010, always good shifting I can count on. And light, too. In fact, SRAM's strong spring makes rear shifting especially reliable with internal routing. A friend of mine recently bought an S5VWD and had the retailer change the parts from Shimano to SRAM. SRAM is good stuff.

To get SRAM on a Cervelo, work with your Cervelo retailer for options. We sell framesets you can build up with any parts, and dealer willing, changing parts (like my friend did) is also an option.

Cheers,

---

Damon Rinard
Engineering Manager,
CSG Road Engineering Department
Cannondale & GT Bicycles
(ex-Cervelo, ex-Trek, ex-Velomax, ex-Kestrel)

Sometimes patience is really hard, fortunately there is a still rockin' SLC to make it easier.

---

*
___/\___/\___/\___ the s u r f b o a r d of the K u r p f a l z is the r o a d b i k e .. oSo >>

Here is a Spring 2015 PDF Catalogue for Europe (in english) with new S5 2015 geometry tables .. http://ilovecycling.de/..._Eurobike_EV_web.pdf .. published at the ilovecycling.de homepage (in german) ..

---

*
___/\___/\___/\___ the s u r f b o a r d of the K u r p f a l z is the r o a d b i k e .. oSo >>

Nice, even the image url on http://www.cervelo.com/en/bikes.html contains _Beauty_ (it's just a new S5 image, no info update yet).

---

*
___/\___/\___/\___ the s u r f b o a r d of the K u r p f a l z is the r o a d b i k e .. oSo >>

Thanks for posting. Good to see official confirmation the geometry is returning to the goodness from a few years ago. Give the low and aero folks a chance again!

Do we have an MSRP for the frameset yet?

stand by!

---

Damon Rinard
Engineering Manager,
CSG Road Engineering Department
Cannondale & GT Bicycles
(ex-Cervelo, ex-Trek, ex-Velomax, ex-Kestrel)

in the EU the frame set incl. fork & post (not handlebar) is listed with EUR 3800.- .. http://www.cervelo-shop-bonn.de/cervélo-s-serie/cervélo-s5-2015/ .. it's about USD 4.800.-

edit: the link has broken signs, just go to .. http://www.cervelo-shop-bonn.de .. and click Cervelo S-Serie and then Cervelo S5 2015, the frame set is listed at the bottom ..

---

*
___/\___/\___/\___ the s u r f b o a r d of the K u r p f a l z is the r o a d b i k e .. oSo >>

Isn't that supposed to be today? I'm on east coast time and I guess there's another 20 minutes to the start of the business day on the west coast.
So
Much
Waiting

My legs are getting tired

Not to stand ore walk here alone makes me so patiently to cook another pot of coffee ..

---

*
___/\___/\___/\___ the s u r f b o a r d of the K u r p f a l z is the r o a d b i k e .. oSo >>