There was a pic posted a while ago in another thread and it didn't get much attention. I think it looks interesting but wonder whether it will be another case of "look at everything we had to do just to make it as fast as our old rim bike"

Wonder if Kienle and Brownlee will have one at 70.3 worlds in a few weeks?

---

Alex Arman

Strava

Not sure about Nice, but Kona for sure. July 2020 availability I believe, but not certain on that one.

---

Jim Manton / ERO Sports

Color me excited. I think the old Plasma was one of the best looking bikes out there. This one may be a bit more on the quirky side but I'm a big fan of quirky bikes as well so I'm excited. Looks like its going to be a no expense spared bike though, at least to start. Hopefully we don't see a release similar to the Shiv Disc where only the pros get it and then it takes a super long time for everyone else.

---

Benjamin Deal - Professional - Instagram - TriRig - Lodi Cyclery
Deals on Wheels - Results, schedule, videos, sponsors

And I see the website also has the shoes with the Boa on the back finally!!

Looks like it has a monopost judging by the fit range and the image. Will be interesting to see whether it breaks the Cervelo patent on the mono design.
Much better fit range than the old model although the XL isn't USAT legal on front centre

I'm curious, what is the patent for? Is it somehow different compared to TriRig, 51 Speedshop, Shiv Tri, etc. that the patent would get Scott in trouble but not the others?

Found the post by MTRIB with pic from July: https://forum.slowtwitch.com/...ost=6990775#p6990775

I don't believe Cervelo, Specialized, Trek, or 51-Speedshop have any patents on their single-riser style bars, but we certainly do: https://patents.google.com/patent/US10160510B1/ - fully granted utility patent.

---

--
TriRig.com

Do you make Cervelo pay royalties, or how is this patent applied?

What’s the deal with the Grand Canyon sized gab between the front wheel and the downtube

---

Matt

I didn’t read through the patent filing in detail, but I did read enough to see his patent is filed a year after the p5x was released. And it’s reasonable to presume the p5x was released years after development on the Cervelo monoriser began.

I would think it would be tough to demand royalties if he indeed claims the monoriser is all his. And I gotta think someone had a monoriser on a pursuit bike or funny bike back in the day, but who knows.

So unless he has evidence to the contrary, it looks like he just might have been first to the courthouse, so to speak. But hey, I write software for a living, so really I have no idea what I’m talking about.

I don’t remember much about IP law from law school but seem to recall that having a patent is no big deal as they are granted regularly and with relative ease. The validity of the patent really gets tested when you want to try to enforce your patent or claim someone else is infringing on it. So, the question is probably....are any of these manufacturers of various monoposts going to start going after each other claiming infringement?? Unlikely, I think. If I’m wrong, I’m sure there are IP attorneys hanging around here who will correct me.

Original 2007 Cervelo application https://patents.google.com/...e=Cervelo+Cycles+Inc
Nick took some pics of the concept they showed in 2011 https://www.tririg.com/...velo_P5_PX_Prototype
2017 one for P5X https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/...a/WO2018053652A1.pdf

Obviously Trek SC2 and Swift Neurogen have been around with mono designs for some time.

As I understand it you would have to contravene all elements of the P5X patent for there to be a case. One of the major elements is hiding the riser in the steerer or fork assembly - which is what the Scott appears to be doing.

The Tririg design is the best example at the moment as there is no x dependency on y (having the riser drop in parallel with the headtube causes the slope in the fit range box seen in the scott geo pic).

Backing up DFW - from when we looked into patents for unique elements of our motion capture software it seemed that a patent means nothing until tested in court, so we didn't bother as wouldn't be able to afford to play that game anyway. Of course, I'm not a lawyer and my interpretation could have been entirely wrong.

My pick is that they're extending the depth of the headtube within UCI rules by having the tube junction of TT and DT behind the 160mm HT depth limit - mimicking the effect of the nosy shiv or hydration systems.

And a way to redirect the air that gets pushed into the back of the fork crown by the front wheel.

TriRig’s post may be inferred to suggest that it was for the number of risers ( in this case, single riser) for which it received a patent.
In fact, in order to differentiate from the prior art, TriRig had to amend to include language on tiltability of the arm rest, relative to stem. So if the other brands don’t have that tiltability feature, no infringement.

Also, the prosecution history shows that an uni-riser system is known (albeit a clunky looking one) from ten years back.

Lastly, the number of risers is an ancillary point. I’m sure that TriRig’s attorneys told TriRig this, but the granted patent may be better described as a grant for system enabling arm rest tiltability effected through one or more risers.

I bet they will. They likely have been training on it for months providing feedback

A stripped paint version...

---

Washed up footy player turned Triathlete.

Hell yeah

Without decals, SCOTT simply braided into the bare carbon blackness

One derrailleur and shifter one cable cos x1

No puncture kit or tube or sparetube or pump or levers cos tubeless

No saddle clamps and no rails cos custom carbon seat fused to post mast on frame

.... matches the tooth brush with half handle cut off for brushing teeth pre race with less expenditure

Just have to work out if the rear derailleur can work with only one jockey wheel

https://www.facebook.com/...sts/2887566241270005

Looks like Cervelo for the mono post.

Agreed. Such a large gap. Plus the loss of the front hydration leaves two very large gaps before you get to the cranks

Would you still say that of the gap makes it faster?

Also, it has integrated hydration. Look for the straw in the picture

Does anyone know what happened with this bike?
No signs of release..

More sites are starting to list it, mostly European ones.

This one says 1-2 day delivery, which I'm not sure I believe.

https://www.winterparkcycles.com/...47856&quantity=1

$15,000 plus tax lol. They gonna pull a specialized and essentially stop making consumer tri bikes?

Or "pull" what every manufacturer does, which is start with top spec and then work down.

Without going back to reread the threads, I think there was mention of an Ultegra Di2 version around $8000. Seems aligned with Cervelo and other brands' pricing.

What's more shocking is something like a $7,650 "sale" price on a super basic Quintana Roo with Ultegra Di2, Shimano training wheels, and a basic aftermarket cockpit.

Goodness, they've gone backward.

They are one of the first who managed to hide most shifter and brake cables, back in 2010 with the Plasma 3 TT

Ten years later, they still got brake cables dangling? SMH...

I think that is a drinking system straw you see - not a brake cable.

But also - I just don’t see how this thing can be for sale, when it isn’t even on the Scott website.

And no athletes are getting this bike and posting pics on social media?

I just don’t see it ... Seems sort of fake.

I hear ya. But the new specialized shiv has been out for almost 2 years? And they haven’t worked down yet 😂

Complaining about the cost of a $7600 bike in a thread about a bike that costs 2x that?? Lol.

At least the QR has trickled down and you can get a full disc brake bike for less than$3k from them.

It just seems that brands aren’t really trickling down. Specialized is still expensive. Cervelo P3X still expensive. I doubt this Scott is going to trickle down. Maybe to $10k??

Where do you see the brake cables other then at the fork and chain stay where they enter the brake caliper.
And even there they seem to be ‘hidden’ by the design.

Jeroen

---

Owner at TRIPRO, The Netherlands

 
Ultegra Di2 Version - $8999 - MSRP

Ah yes, you are right. I didn't look as carefully and thought it looked like two separate cables, whereas it's just the drinking tube.

Yes and I would also complain about a $50k Corolla hatchback in a thread about a $100k 911 S. They're not even the same spec.

The sale-priced $7600 QR is a non-superbike with training wheels and FSA cranks while the $8999 retail-priced Plasma has carbon wheels and Ultegra cranks. The fact that retail on that QR if $8,500 is hilarious. That's $500 more than a Di2 P5 or P3x

The Specialized, P3X, and Plasma will never trickle down to $3k because they aren't simple double triangle bikes with standard cockpits. We'll be lucky to see them around $5k, which will probably happen once they are many years old. They aren't in the same league as QR, which is more like a P-series or Plasma 10. For reference the P-series Di2 retails for $2000 less than the PRsix2 and is better equipped.

xOld discussion but will post anyway. Got few months back Scott Plasma 6 RC with new Zipp 808 NSW. unbelievable smooth and fast riding machine! No wonder triathlete.com gave it 5 starts and called best tested Tri bike so far they tested https://www.triathlete.com/...rc-6-triathlon-bike/

Wow!

Canyon keeps delaying release of CFR in USA.

Now this!! ;-D

From info I can gather, and seeing Keinle this weekend I'm more than interested. Can you comment on bar tilt. they have listed as 15 degrees on Plasma 6 , that with tilt wedge(tri rig) I would be able to replicate mantis position i now have. Which does not appear possible on CFR with max tilt of 10 degrees and perceived limitations of mono post?

Thanks

David

I also was watching Speedmax release in US, specifically CF SLR. Hasn't happened and I needed a bike for June races. No regrets with Scott Plasma 6!
I feel very comfortable with aerobars tilt as it shows on the pic. I believe you can make angle even bigger with the accessories included (Scott animation at this URL shows how it changes https://www.scott-sports.com/us/en/plasma-6) but not sure what the max is to be honest. Also note that at this Scott page aerobars they show are more flat compared with ones on my bike. With my aerobars version you can get bigger angle if that is what you need (i think i have "Extension E2" in oppose "Extension E1" as shown at Scott Syncros page: https://www.syncros.com/...ad-triathlon-cockpit...)
But I agree, the tilt ability on this bike is definitely bigger than on Speedmax...

Hope this helps
Alex

 

Alex :

Is there room above bottom bracket to mount aero bottle on downtube??? How's the refilling on the fly of the intergrated bladder?

Have located a bike. .. sigh ... why is it always hard to pull the trigger??

paralysis by analysis :-D

Again THANKS in Advance

David

Yes you can put water bottle on down tube, there are screws to mount the cage. However, if you do that you will not be able to leverage above the bottom bracket gel container. The cage would block it. Frankly if you use integrated bladder (650 ml) and two behind the seat cages, you don't need the forth on the down tube...
As for refill on the fly, Flap the cover and the opening is big enough so you can squeeze the bottle to fill it up without spilling around. Canyon Speedmax CFR has a valve instead but probably you would need to be more precise to discharge the bottle into the bladder.

my two cents :)

Nothing to comment other than to say, that is a sexy bike.

Just week ago i recalled to try to do refill ion the fly.. Worked great :) I was in the group crossing at about 20m/h pulled out the line just in a case and discharged bottle into the front hydration container no issue put the bottle back into the rear cage...

Also...I thought bottom gel container is just a marketing gimmick and i will never be able do bend down and take gel container while riding..Well.. did it already couple times...it is just the matter of practice... Btw i purchased Hummer liquid gel and diluted it further with just small amount of water so it can be more drinkable...