i haven't seen the data and obviously nobody has seen the write-up but at first blush, from what i can see: bravo. you guys did a really nice job. thanks for your hard work.
i'm sure my reticence, caveats and stated concerns made your lives harder. to the degree that made the test better, then great. to the degree it didn't (because it was going to be well done anyway), i regret that.
if you don't mind i'm going to make the following guesses, proclamations, statements, predictions (we'll see if i turn out to be right):
- to brian and heath who, by all accounts i've heard, produced an excellent test, i suspect you have a new revenue stream if you want it. just, i'll bet it's a lot more nerve wracking and exacting testing 5 bikes with the same position than testing 5 positions on the same bike.
- to kiley: my posture as moderator here has always been consistent: i stand up for the folks on the inside who do the hard work (harder work than those on the outside ever suspect). you're on the inside now, which means i'll stand up for you when those on the outside take unfair shots at you (at least as regards this test!).
- about that P5X, which you didn't want to take to the tunnel because it was obviously no match aerodynamically for the other bikes, i'll be interested to see if you still feel that way once the test is published.
- same for disc brake tri bikes. i'll eat my hat if the disc brake bikes, as a pair, test more than 2 watts slower than the 2 best disc rim brake bikes you tested, in a blended sweep, and normalized down to 24mph (where people actually ride their bikes).
- there are no dogs when you get to the pointy end. bike makers today know what they're doing. i suspect that tire choices, and matching the best tire shape to the wheels you own, ends up making as much more more difference than the best frame to the worst frame among the new bikes tested. (we'll see if i just embarrassed myself with this statement.)
- i would also bet that the bikes are so close that hydration and storage preferences, ability to work on these bikes, travel with them, overwhelm the aero differences and (along with price, ability to obtain the bike, warranty, ability to test ride the bike) become the purchase imperatives.
- and finally, kiley, your cockpit is too long. this didn't matter in the test, because your cockpit was universally too long. but your position could use a little fiddling in my opinion. once it's dialed, THAT will make more difference than which of these 6 bikes you're riding, which is why i scratch my head at the keen interest among consumers in buying this versus that bike, in light of the fairly cavalier approach by so many users in how to ride properly on the product.
it was fun to watch. once you guys recover you ought to do it with helmets, where i suspect you might see a larger delta between the products than you may have seen with these frames.
Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
i'm sure my reticence, caveats and stated concerns made your lives harder. to the degree that made the test better, then great. to the degree it didn't (because it was going to be well done anyway), i regret that.
if you don't mind i'm going to make the following guesses, proclamations, statements, predictions (we'll see if i turn out to be right):
- to brian and heath who, by all accounts i've heard, produced an excellent test, i suspect you have a new revenue stream if you want it. just, i'll bet it's a lot more nerve wracking and exacting testing 5 bikes with the same position than testing 5 positions on the same bike.
- to kiley: my posture as moderator here has always been consistent: i stand up for the folks on the inside who do the hard work (harder work than those on the outside ever suspect). you're on the inside now, which means i'll stand up for you when those on the outside take unfair shots at you (at least as regards this test!).
- about that P5X, which you didn't want to take to the tunnel because it was obviously no match aerodynamically for the other bikes, i'll be interested to see if you still feel that way once the test is published.
- same for disc brake tri bikes. i'll eat my hat if the disc brake bikes, as a pair, test more than 2 watts slower than the 2 best disc rim brake bikes you tested, in a blended sweep, and normalized down to 24mph (where people actually ride their bikes).
- there are no dogs when you get to the pointy end. bike makers today know what they're doing. i suspect that tire choices, and matching the best tire shape to the wheels you own, ends up making as much more more difference than the best frame to the worst frame among the new bikes tested. (we'll see if i just embarrassed myself with this statement.)
- i would also bet that the bikes are so close that hydration and storage preferences, ability to work on these bikes, travel with them, overwhelm the aero differences and (along with price, ability to obtain the bike, warranty, ability to test ride the bike) become the purchase imperatives.
- and finally, kiley, your cockpit is too long. this didn't matter in the test, because your cockpit was universally too long. but your position could use a little fiddling in my opinion. once it's dialed, THAT will make more difference than which of these 6 bikes you're riding, which is why i scratch my head at the keen interest among consumers in buying this versus that bike, in light of the fairly cavalier approach by so many users in how to ride properly on the product.
it was fun to watch. once you guys recover you ought to do it with helmets, where i suspect you might see a larger delta between the products than you may have seen with these frames.
Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
