I'm surprised that fenders haven't made their way into cycling until now. Looks like a nice way to package it.

Just thinking a bit further, how would you get one of those into a bike box?

Holy moly.

I did a reverse image search on Google, and it came up with "best guess: bicycle".

I like it though. It's badass in it's dont-give-a-fuck-ery.

---

'It never gets easier, you just get crazier.'

That's the front fork...

It looks like you need to rotate the handlebars to get the front wheel off?...

Either way, would love to see some aero data/comparison. I like the creativity (and possible innovation) of it.

---

Strava

Assuming this is genuine then I don't think getting the front wheel off would be a problem, standard through axel. But the front brake cable will go through the fender so I cannot see how to detach it from the rest of the frame in order to pack it into a box.

In terms of aerodynamics it seems to be taking the Andean idea further in terms of making the lower part of the bike, starting from the front wheel, a tear drop shape.

I'd think that fork/fender would weigh a lot more than a traditional fork. Would there be that much aero savings by making it this way? I'd think there could be a chance the wheel/tire could 'bottom out' based on the design and how tight that tire looks to the top of the fork.

I think it would look a lot cooler without the elaborate fork.

---

Blog: http://262toboylstonstreet.blogspot.com/
https://twitter.com/NateThomasTri
Coaching: https://bybtricoaching.com/ - accepting athletes for 2023

Unconventional? Yes
Ugly? Nah - You've just got a conservative aesthetic prejudice setting.

That is as ugly as my ex girlfriends personality....but I'll bet the ride is world class :-)

Good try, I got a twenty year old C4 carbon crono frame off eBay that I'm riding this year for the hell of it. I like weird, I just don't quite get the fender thing. The title of this thread is from the road.cc article which I though was worth plagiarising.

I agree with the other poster that with a more conventional fork this bike would look better (and possibly be way more practical).

If it makes you feel any better, Andy Potts will be banging out the miles on her in his pain cave...

Exactly

I'm curious about the stress points on that front fork design from an engineering perspective (I'm no engineer).

Is horizontal more structurally strong? What is the movement of the wheel when it hits a good bump or squirrley bit in the road?

Everyone loves a good hammering in their pain cave

If its fast, its pretty

Well, props to them for trying something new. Cool if it works.

---

Aaron Bales
Lansing Triathlon Team

It’s fugly to me, but I also don’t like the Dimond, Ventum or the new Cervelo.

Ya those bikes are horribly ugly. They also just look heavy. People like gradual change, not radical change haha

Here's the thing. I wasn't entirely kidding in my previous post. To a huge extent, what you find attractive or not is dictated by what is perceived to be functionally desirable and socially acceptable. Some are far more conservative than others and will balk at anything that doesn't closely resemble what they're already familiar with. You may have liked a 20 year old "weird" bike, but do you like any current ones? On the other hand, everyone's entitled to their taste. There's no right and wrong.
Surely the intention of eliminating the conventional fork legs and replacing them with the "fender" and horizontal wheel beams is to reduce drag? I hardly think they did it because they were unaware it would look strange!

The enemy of innovation, especially in engineering, is fashion.

No I get your point, and we're all human after all. It's not as if we don't have a catalog of fashion "faux pas" photos that we wish no one would know about. I like many of the new non diamond shape frames, I've been long hoping for their re-emergence . The old Hotta was my favourite. However we know so much more about frame aerodynamics that their added value is way less than the mid 90s, when they were up against round tubes.

I really like the basic frame of this Ceepo and it seems to be doing what the Andean is with regards to making disc brakes competitive, which is your point exactly.

The reason for the C4 was precisely because I know my next proper TT bike will need to have disc brakes, that's the way the world is going, and I need to start saving up for the whole shebang and not just a few bits and pieces.

However the fender looks like a nightmare for traveling but I suspect there is way more to it then the photo shows.

The perfect bike for a certain segment of the triathlete population:

Those with money to spend, and the desire to spend it to consume conspicuously. These people want others to give them attention, either by asking all sorts of questions, or by simply looking at it for a long time. Sorta like those who buy a custom Bentley or Aston-Martin, and who drive it down a busy street or park it with a valet (who will then park it prominently in front of the establishment), so they can see people turn their heads.

Those trying to buy speed.

A few pros who get these free AND get sponsor money.

How many of us have seen someone riding a $12K bike to a 14 hour finish?

OBVIOUSLY, it's awesome that people are out there working out, living a healthy lifestyle, setting goals, chasing dreams, but, HONESTLY: for these people, aside from making them happy or filling some void (retail therapy?), how much difference would this (or ANY "super bike") make to a 15mph average over, say, a $1000 bike with 105 all around?

This kind of thing just serves to raise the cost of "belonging" to the tri-world. It reinforces the idea that technology and cost are more important than the work. "Buying" the engine, instead of "building" the engine. Keeping up with the Jone$e$.

I know this is coming off as shrill and judgmental, but, come on. I got into IM because I liked working hard (above all), setting goals, and doing something to be proud of. I have a PR of 11:18 (and 11:5x on a 95 degree day), having ridden a $1600 aluminum Cervelo, with 105 all around, and stock wheels with clincher casings and $7 butyl tubes. I wore a basic swim suit in the water, changed to an old bike jersey and shorts in T1, and changed into old running shorts and singlet in T2. In short, I'm a cheapskate, a budget triathlete, and I did ok. I didn't lose sleep thinking I'd have been 6 minutes faster if I had spent $5000 more.

Congrats to CEEPO, though. "A fool and his money are soon parted." When should I start looking at Ebay or Craigslist for those outdated 2014 bikes?

OK, rant over. Deep breath. Sorry for wasting everyone's time. Carry on.

It's an uglier copy of the P5-X. Cervelo is either pissed right now or laughing?

---

Make Inside Out Sports your next online tri shop! http://www.insideoutsports.com/

Who are these people who think spending money is a replacement for training?
Are they real or imaginary?

Easy tiger! "A fool and his money are soon parted" already exists in terms of tri bikes, most notably with the P5-X. Moreover we have no idea how much this CEEPO will cost. Also, we all know that a Cervelo P2 or Premier Tactical will be sufficient and ensure your bike is not the limiter but that's not the point. I also can wax lyrical about decent IM bike splits on round tubed alu 9 speed heavy bikes of 20 years ago, and that is more to the point, bikes have moved on and there is a notable trickle down effect. Even entry level bikes now days are way way better than what we were riding years ago. For pure time trailing aero is a limiter but I agree for IM this is not the case, getting the required hours of training is for most age-groupers. What we're starting to see is the next generation of top end tri bikes, 5 years later as you correctly surmised, entry level bikes will have many of these features. Starting with disc brakes...

Consider if the intention is not to reduce drag but to give the appearance that you (as a bike manufacturer) have said, “Tradition be damned. I will make a radical design.” This may have the effect of making your bike seem fast and therefore sell well (at least initially). Consider that maybe less time and money may be invested to make a new bike that looks “radical” than might be required to do the science to design and test a truly dogma shattering bike. I have no way of knowing what work went into this bike. Just consider that “radical” can also be a fashion.

Hello SteveMc and All,

Thanks for posting.



It is possible that some decent drag reductions could be achieved with properly shaped wheel fenders .... front and back ....

Although reworking the 'old fashioned' existing simple fork design might not achieve an overall gain in drag reduction.

Without rain would fenders be classified as 'fairings'?

Looks like the camel has his nose in the tent ....

Perhaps next step is a butt 'fender cone' .... a streamlined 'butt cone' to fend of water spray from the back wheel (and reduce drag).

Proof in pudding .... how does bike test in tunnel?

---

Cheers, Neal

+1 mph Faster

The P5-X is a great bike. I wouldn't call someone who bought one a "fool."

But if I were a triathlete of the class for whom $10-$20K is basically pocket change, what's not to like? There's good evidence it's extraordinarily aerodynamically efficient. Super easy to set up. Presumably great braking. What's not to like?

It's not the most cost-effective bike. But whatever...if cost-effectiveness is a high priority for you, buy a P2 or something.

I don't quite get all the P5-X butthurt.

And I'm a damned roadie.

(yawn) 1 out of 10 on the troll-o-meter.

I'm really glad I got that 1/10.

Nice idea that looks viable ..

---

*
___/\___/\___/\___ 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 >>

So I can race this, but I can't run an extented stem with a chest pad and rock the egg on my funny bike?

---

____________________________________
Pain is inevitable. Suffering is up to you.

I wonder why they use the set-forward seatpost, when they could just make the beam a few inches shorter, and use a regular post.

Love it! I just like the out of the box thinking..

---

Owner at TRIPRO, The Netherlands

Probably because it is the reversible post they already use on all of their current TT/Tri bikes.

Having been sponsored by Ceepo, yes I like the look of this new design.

BUT, from a geometry standpoint..... Has anyone looked closely at the rake/trial of the headtube and front wheel axle???? From the picture, it looks very large. Meaning, the bike will turn like a chopper style motorcycle, ie: not well at all.

It could be the picture, but to me the rake/trail is way off for any decent turning, especially at any speed or sharp cornering. So, perhaps this is just a rendering picture??

---

Team Zoot-Texas, and Pickle Juice

It’s certainly never going in a bike box :)

---

Developing aero, fit and other fun stuff at Red is Faster

I don't disagree with you, but was in a shop one day last year, when a new moderately obese P5X owner came in demanding the stem/pads be raised. The shop manager looked at her with a bit of exasperation as she was already the high limit and wanted to be raised another 2 inches or so...funniest thing I witnessed in days.

He was gently trying to tell her that losing 50lbs might allow her to actually ride the bike within the designed front end tolerances...Some people who have the money need to be on a P2 it seems...

---

---

"Only those who risk going too far can possibly find out how far one can go." T.S. Elliot | Cycle2Tri.com
Sponsors: SciCon | | Every Man Jack

I was going to make a post about the shark fin on the fender/fork and then I thought maybe it has to do with the transition from the fender sloping up to it sloping down toward the head tube which made me realize:

That wheel is WAY in front of the head tube and the steering axis. This bike seems to fit into the previously unknown category of "short and low".

Handling is going to be... strange.

This kinda makes me think this is not real. It looks like maybe it was deleted from that bike radar post?

---

-------------
Ed O'Malley
www.VeloVetta.com
Founder of VeloVetta Cycling Shoes
Instagram • Facebook

Specialized fUCI?

Yes, function defines form, but you can design something aero and it be nice to look at : Cinelli Laser, Lotus 108, and English spring to mind.

---

Developing aero, fit and other fun stuff at Red is Faster

i'm interested in knowing why you think it's got too much, or not enough, offset. i think whatever you're looking at is an optical illusion. i did a quick and dirty overlay of a p5x image, lining up the head tube top, and the front dropouts of both bikes lined up pretty spot on.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

i don't know if it's a real bike or not, but a couple of points. first, i just think you and taugen are wrong. your eyes are playing tricks on you. i'd be surprised if that isn't a very conventional steering geometry.

second, there's been a guy making the rounds, i've run into him a few times, he's an inventor, he's got some spokes he's invented, and he's got a sort of add-on fender like this. but it's not a fender. if you think about it, the spokes are rotating with the wind from the dropout down. they're rotating against the wind the entire upper half of the wheel. so, rather than fairing the whole wheel, you simply fair the top half. the ceepo guys are some of the most innovative in cycling. they're not dumb. i'd be very surprised if this wasn't their thinking.

now, they either did or didn't miss an opportunity. one very, very big issue in tri bike riding today is steering torque. i wrote about this here, and i used this drawing in the article i wrote.



see all that green? and tan? that's what sits in front of the steering axis, and in front of the front tire contact patch. along with your body, all that green and tan gets hit in the wind, and it pushes you rotationally around the steering axis.

see that purple? if the fork included some sort of surface area extension back there, to neutralize the steering torque, you could ride a much more aerodynamic bike with impunity.

enter that ceepo "fender", which acts, theoretically, both as a fairing in the most important part of the bike, and as a steering torque neutralizer.

now how ugly is the bike?

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

When I first saw this bike here this morning, my answer was "bike is ugly AF."

After revisiting a couple times since, it now has me thinking "hmmmm."

It still looks to me ugly AF, but find myself wondering if some of the unusual design choices make it faster, and each time I conclude that Ceepo may be on to something in the aero sense, I find myself thinking it's ever so slightly less ugly AF.

---

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

You guys are all going to laugh...but I actually kind of like it. It's similar to some ideas I've sketched out in the past.

It still doesn't need disc brakes though. Although, the front end does have the possibility of minimizing the aero drag hit a bit more than a regular fork. The rear braking disc is still just literally redundant ;-)

---

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

...it also reminds me of this:

---

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

<nitpick> The spokes below the hub are still moving forwards into the wind, just slower...


from: https://www.bikeradar.com/...-spoke-patent-52423/

Haha that was my first thought??? Remove the fork (if you call it that) and pack it beside maybe?

i don't mind your nitpick. my explanation just seemed the easiest way to explain the concept.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

For obvious reasons, I am quite fond of the Bowden Spacelander.
The Ceepo, not so much, though they claim it is much faster than a traditional design.

Says who?

-bobo

---

"What's good for me ain't necessarily good for the weak-minded."

I used to see this in the late 70ies early 80ies

---

NO

+1. If you accept that we are at "peak aero" for current bikes, something like this is what it will take to improve further. Getting rid of the fork legs is probably more important than removing the seat stays. The profile of the front fender can be made more optimal than a more or less round tire attached to an aero profiled rim. Kudos to Ceepo for thinking out of the box.

I like it. The only thing I can't make sense of is the "nose cone" that seems to be quite far from the head tube. Can anyone help me out with that? Am I not seeing something correctly?

I'm in agreement with Dan: they should investigate adding surface area behind the steering axis. One obvious benefit to this design is that front tire choice becomes a whole lot easier as you simply go with the fastest option from a CRR standpoint (at least I'd assume).

Hello cyclenutnz and All,



'Nothing new under the sun' .... I like it.

I wonder how stiff the front of the Ceepo is for steering even with the 'shark fin' add on?

Fun to see new stuff ............ That's from the past.

---

Cheers, Neal

+1 mph Faster

The more I see it the more i like it.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

You didn't go back far enough:

---

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

I was thinking that too and only thing I can come up with is it is bolted to the end of the stem and extra support for the wheel cowling/fork. There looks like a plate attached there to that connects around the steerer tube.

The bars look unaero and the nose cone looks a bit weired but that is an interesting bike.

The head referee. Unusual equipment.

---

____________________________________
Pain is inevitable. Suffering is up to you.

Did nobody else notice the new aerobar from fsa on there.

Seems to be a one piece design with the tilt which we saw first in kona 2 yrs ago.

Add me in to the crazies who like it. A lot of it makes sense and I appreciate the innovation. Love that it appears as though you can choose your own cockpit. Also looks like there's integrated storage on the top tube. The possible higher weight of the front end worries me a little, and there's one component choice I don't like with that build, but otherwise, I can't wait to see one. That is, if it's real.

---

Jim Manton / ERO Sports

You were told that by Jimmy R. or USAT Ref?

-bobo

---

"What's good for me ain't necessarily good for the weak-minded."

100% real. One Ceepo athlete has been riding it since April in training and testing.

---

-Of course it's 'effing hard, it's IRONMAN!
Team ZOOT
ZOOT, QR, Garmin, HED Wheels, Zealios, FormSwim, Precision Hydration, Rudy Project

The nosecone seems to be to route the front brake cable through. I wonder how that's going to be done, as it could be a real nightmare if done badly.

---

'It never gets easier, you just get crazier.'

yeah Thierry Marie used the butt cone when he won the TdF prologue in 1986...here it is



One of the reasons why I recall who was riding the butt cone was in the 1986 TdF the first ever North American to wear the yellow jersey took it off the back of Thierry Marie the next day. Canadian Alex Stieda took the yellow jersey the next morning on a breakaway for 7-11 taking the yellow before Lemond would get it. But day 2 was a 2 stage split stage day so Steida loses the yellow later that afternoon. But for half a day, we had a Canadian in the yellow jersey! Alex Steida was also the first pro cyclist to ride a softride in racing to my best knowledge, so there is a link to this thread with the crazy Ceepo beam bike.

Needs this wheel:

---

--
TriRig.com

I want to hear that bike with that wheel go past, just as long as I can keep my eyes closed.

---

Developing aero, fit and other fun stuff at Red is Faster

Ugly or not is irrelevant (to me). The question should be "Where do we draw the line?" - otherwise I'm not going to wait for small evolutionary steps, and show up to a race with a fully-faired teardrop shaped bike, but bolt on the fairing so I could argue it's structurally necessary. Boom, sub-4 bike splits on no watts at all.

---

ZONE3 - We Last Longer

Put a regular fork on it and I like it! In black, red, and white though. Those are the only colors a real bike should be.

---

----------------------------------------------------------
Zen and the Art of Triathlon. Strava Workout Log
Interviews with Chris McCormack, Helle Frederikson, Angela Naeth, and many more.
http://www.zentriathlon.com

When I first saw this, my initial reaction was WTF..? That is hideous..! But then I looked again, and again, and thought about it. Now I love it. It's a bit nuts, but so what? It's a big boys toy, so why shouldn't it challenge us. So many of the bikes now are so similar that they are just boring. OK, it will cost a lot, but if you have the cash, why not.

I'm lucky in that I have a good job, no kids and a wife who 'gets-it', so dropping a few K's on a wacky bike is fine, especially if it is fast and rides well. My mates and coach would take the piss but I can guarantee that they would want a go on it at some point.

And yes, I'd also put 2 spoke wheels on, just for the hell of it..! Bring on the 'super-bikes' I say, and let them be as imaginative as possible. I really hope innovation in 2018/9 isn't just more carbon-copy bikes but with disc brakes.

Cervelo did a great job on the P5X. Again, I hated it..but now I get it. sure, it has it's faults..but it made a statement and does everything it was designed to to. To start with I thought it was way too expensive, but when you look at what you get for your money It's not cheap by any means, but it's really not that excessive.

Now that it is officially released and they have also announced the non fender model, the Shadow, I think it adds to the discussion. The Shadow looks similar to any another beam bike. It is the outside the box thinking and design at this point that is unique in order to move or attempt to move the needle on bringing a more aero bike to market. I think the Shadow looks really slick, the Shadow-R is stilling growing on me but can appreciate the innovation of it.

Just an FYI (in case people aren't aware): similar "ass fairings" have been around since at least the 1930s.

(The name "Oscar Egg" comes to mind.)

There you go! I should have read the entire thread before posting.

More pics/data:
https://bikerumor.com/2018/07/06/wild-ceepo-shadow-r-sidefork-turns-conventional-fork-design-on-its-head/

Creative way to save air drag up front...brilliant if it works well - cheers to CEEPO.

No way it would work in a UCI/USAC event (TT)....rules. But in another venue, it may be amazingly fast. Could be super heavy too.


Jeff

I like it how it looks. But regarding the aero claims, show me the data.

The frame and fork are 3.9kg from what I've read. That compares to a 2kg P5 frameset, for a baseline.

---

'It never gets easier, you just get crazier.'