it's a pity for giant that they did not get the fastest bike split. they lost a lot of marketing potential

seems reasonable to me...

the real question is when will there be a new trinity

it's a pity for giant that they did not get the fastest bike split. they lost a lot of marketing potential

~7000€ frame-only

seems reasonable to me...

the real question is when will there be a new trinity

it's a pity for giant that they did not get the fastest bike split. they lost a lot of marketing potential

Usually fine tuning positions takes a while

How long before the event were you introduced to the bike?

Impressive to ride that fast on a borrowed bike

The riders got to keep the bikes

As they didn’t get the fastest split due to equipment choices with this frameset being one of them along with helmet and tyre choices it’s not surprising.

Have you seen the four spoke Cadex wheel? No science gone into that it has been an open mould available out a factory in Taiwan for over 10 years. The trailing edge on the spokes are square...

Have you seen the four spoke Cadex wheel? No science gone into that it has been an open mould available out a factory in Taiwan for over 10 years. The trailing edge on the spokes are square...

Source? Not saying I don’t believe you but my understanding….not sure if true…is that giant after Boeing and Airbus is the third largest consumer of Carbon Fiber on the planet.

My understanding is that they actually build bikes and components for other companies.

Maurice

BS
- no science: Giant worked with ACE on wheel development.
- open mold: they have their own factories
- square trailing edge: truncated airfoils don't mean the wheel is any less aero.

I talked to someone who deals a in wheels, has been to the factory and said anyone can have the same wheel built with their brand on it as Cadex don’t own it. I had been talking about buying one and he pointed out to me the facts and highlighted the square edge. Have a look at some online pics and you’ll see for yourself…

https://www.cadex-cycling.com/...-spoke-aero-tubeless

- open mold: they have their own factories

They tried to buy the factory that makes their rims but it didn't go through.

The bonus with the Cadex is that, as well as being more expensive than a P5, it fits lower/longer too. Which is good for a limited subset of the market (no really big size in case you're wondering) but not great for the majority

Do any of you all think that if a company made an aero "wide" fork that fits your TT/tri bike that people would buy it? If it cost let's say $2k?

I think they would.

Cadex employee at Sub7/Sub8 confirms:
Pre-orders start June
Deliveries starting September
~7000€ frame-only
No complete builds
Only through special tri dealers



7000€ is crazy. Was really hoping for Trinity-level value :(

And at these prices, I will not buy another superbike again.

Do any of you all think that if a company made an aero "wide" fork that fits your TT/tri bike that people would buy it? If it cost let's say $2k?

I think they would.

Rumor goed that it includes a special travelcase for that price as well. Nothing confirmed yet, but heard this.
If that is a solid case the price for the whole frame kit/bar system is more appealing. Not that it is ‘ cheap’ but a good travel case included softens the price somewhat ;-)

Jeroen

Yes, somewhat. Lol

The Ordu OMX with custom paint is 3800€. In comparison, I really see no reason for the Cervelo P5/PX to be 5300€. Then this Giant is another 1000€ if we pretend the case is worth 700€. It's double what the Ordu costs!

Ordu has hydration and tool storage. Only thing missing is a bento, I guess. I'd mount one BTA if I wanted solids.

No matter how we look at it, +3200€ sure is a lot for a bento. The PX is also much much cheaper and has a bento.

My point was more that Cervelo is already obscenely priced and the Cadex goes far beyond that.

I know these things aren't perfect comparisons, but do put it into perspective: a Kawasaki Ninja 650R costs roughly what a Cadex frame costs, and that one comes with the full "groupset" and wheels. There's even a very large bento under the seat :P Materials cost, manufacturing cost, shipping cost, R&D cost are all in the bicycle's favor. Only economy of scale is in the motorcycle's favor and that won't make up the difference.

Can we agree integrated storage is not worth a 3200€ premium? Or $1500€ over a PX?

Gotta love graphs with unlabeled axes...

Just read the pdf file and you can find it says 47 kmph.

Jeroen

I’m sorry, but they had the bonus of both time and the lack of uci rules…… and came up with…… a slower bike.

What do UCI rules have to do with it? The other two bikes are also not UCI legal designs

Wait, what? This thing is slower than a Canyon (and P5X) unless you're spending all your time at 10+ deg yaw? Why did they even include that chart?

Giant is a unique microcosm that isn't aware of how much the rest of the world understands.
The trinity release data showed the bike to be slower than the P5 and Speed Concept but they came up with a messy way to display it to obfuscate that.

I've digitised this new data so I can model with it.
Using the IMNZ model with 2021 weather for a 4.15 rider (average yaw 1.8deg)
Canyon 17s faster (8 of aero, 9 of mass)
P5X 96s faster (96 of aero, -16 mass)

So clearly the answer for non-UCI is to get a P5X and strip some weight off. Which Cervelo did with the P3X... Best grab one of those while you still can

However, the Cadex does come into its own if you go a lot slower on a really windy day
IMNZ 2019 conditions for a 6.30 rider gave an average yaw of 8.8deg and thus a 34s advantage for the Cadex over the P5X

Of course, independent testing might show a different outcome.

Giant is a unique microcosm that isn't aware of how much the rest of the world understands.
The trinity release data showed the bike to be slower than the P5 and Speed Concept but they came up with a messy way to display it to obfuscate that.

I've digitised this new data so I can model with it.
Using the IMNZ model with 2021 weather for a 4.15 rider (average yaw 1.8deg)
Canyon 17s faster (8 of aero, 9 of mass)
P5X 96s faster (96 of aero, -16 mass)

So clearly the answer for non-UCI is to get a P5X and strip some weight off. Which Cervelo did with the P3X... Best grab one of those while you still can

However, the Cadex does come into its own if you go a lot slower on a really windy day
IMNZ 2019 conditions for a 6.30 rider gave an average yaw of 8.8deg and thus a 34s advantage for the Cadex over the P5X

Of course, independent testing might show a different outcome.

Only because of that P5X rising positive yaw drag, right? If that's not accurate, P5X is faster everywhere

Very interesting, but not a lot of us normal mortals rude 4:15.

But really interested what your software calculates on a IMNZ 5 hr bike ride on the named bikes.

Maybe time to bump up the training...

LOL, yes, but even then I will never be able to ride 4:15 :-) I wish.....

---

Owner at TRIPRO, The Netherlands

littlefoot wrote:

That is a great position. I know he must put in the time training wise, but I'd love to know how he his able to hold that position for so long. It seems like it would be challenging on the eyes and neck after 90 minutes.

What are the road conditions like where this was done-you have any idea?

Anyone heard about availability for North America?

My frameset has just arrived in the shop (Velocity44 Stirling UK).

Just waiting on the 4 spoke/disc wheels now...

Cheers, Andy

To answer my own question the word I got from a Cadex rep is that the earliest we’d see North American availability is “maybe” 2024. 🙁

I just saw a Instagram post from a guy I know locally (Boston, MA area) who just got one and posted a video of his fitting just yesterday. Not sure of his connections, though.

Just heard back. Apparently he ordered it through a bike shop in Australia, then had it shipped to the US!

That’s a shame for you over there. Sold already 7 of them, 4 custom painted.
Check our FB or insta for the pics ;-).

Jeroen