Hmmm ... if the Tour bikes weren't prototypes ... it shouldn't take that long??
Triathlon Forum
Login required to started new threads
Login required to post replies
Re: new Giant, Shiv and P4 UCI illegal? [Carl]
[ In reply to ]
Well I assume you folks @Trek are working furiously to get the Speed Concept out to the public in 2010 to take advantage of the vacuum at the top e/o the UCI-legal field??
Hmmm ... if the Tour bikes weren't prototypes ... it shouldn't take that long??
Hmmm ... if the Tour bikes weren't prototypes ... it shouldn't take that long??
Re: new Giant, Shiv and P4 UCI illegal? [jackmott]
[ In reply to ]
"in high school debate this kind of argument didn't fly"
Absolutely, Jack. That's why I'm not using it to argue that the rules are fine because your proposal has already been tried. I'm not debating the worthiness of the rules themselves. The statement is simply to illustrate that there are difficulties to the situation beyond just identifying a technical description.
Absolutely, Jack. That's why I'm not using it to argue that the rules are fine because your proposal has already been tried. I'm not debating the worthiness of the rules themselves. The statement is simply to illustrate that there are difficulties to the situation beyond just identifying a technical description.
Re: new Giant, Shiv and P4 UCI illegal? [Dave Luscan]
[ In reply to ]
Please forgive my ignorance beforehand. I've never done a UCI licenced time trial. I've also never worked in the bike manufacturing industry. However, I do have a few questions:
-As a bike manufacturer, why do I care if my bike isn't UCI legal? I'm assuming that many of my customers are triathletes and will never do any time trials that won't allow their tri bikes. In fact, I would advertise my bike as being sooooo fast that the UCI banned for being and unfair advantage. I could then make custom tt bikes for any teams that I sponsor that fit under the guidelines. Sure, making custom rigs are expensive, but it happens all the time anyway!
-As a consumer, why do I care about UCI regulations? Again, I am a triathlete who doesn't have many of the same guidelines for my bike. Most of us don't even do time trials (I'm not sure why that it, but it's true).
-As a bike manufacturer, why do I care if my bike isn't UCI legal? I'm assuming that many of my customers are triathletes and will never do any time trials that won't allow their tri bikes. In fact, I would advertise my bike as being sooooo fast that the UCI banned for being and unfair advantage. I could then make custom tt bikes for any teams that I sponsor that fit under the guidelines. Sure, making custom rigs are expensive, but it happens all the time anyway!
-As a consumer, why do I care about UCI regulations? Again, I am a triathlete who doesn't have many of the same guidelines for my bike. Most of us don't even do time trials (I'm not sure why that it, but it's true).
Re: new Giant, Shiv and P4 UCI illegal? [Tri Slow Poke]
[ In reply to ]
As a bike manufacturer, why do I care if my bike isn't UCI legal?
Because there is a really bizarre relationship in peoples minds between what bikes are fast and who rides them. For instance, Cervelo rode the CSC success and Cancellara's world time trial championships to the perception, perhaps correctly, that they made the fastest bikes in the world. They went from being a fairly small, well-regarded company to an industry 500-pound gorilla. What did that have to do with triathlon? Nothing.
Bike manufacturers don't want to cut off a percentage of their total sales if they can help it (i.e. the bike racers). Plus, none of the independents like Softride were able to definatively prove a non-UCI compliant design was faster.
I suspect that if the UCI becomes too stringent, then an independent is going come up with something faster, but again will have to overcome the perceptions of the unsophisticated to get the masses to buy it.
Chad
Because there is a really bizarre relationship in peoples minds between what bikes are fast and who rides them. For instance, Cervelo rode the CSC success and Cancellara's world time trial championships to the perception, perhaps correctly, that they made the fastest bikes in the world. They went from being a fairly small, well-regarded company to an industry 500-pound gorilla. What did that have to do with triathlon? Nothing.
Bike manufacturers don't want to cut off a percentage of their total sales if they can help it (i.e. the bike racers). Plus, none of the independents like Softride were able to definatively prove a non-UCI compliant design was faster.
I suspect that if the UCI becomes too stringent, then an independent is going come up with something faster, but again will have to overcome the perceptions of the unsophisticated to get the masses to buy it.
Chad
Re: new Giant, Shiv and P4 UCI illegal? [Dave Luscan]
[ In reply to ]
Has anyone else noticed that no where on Cervelo's page do they say that the P4 is UCI compliant? They say that the P3, P2, and P1 are complaint on there pages. This could be an oversight and mean nothing or they could be hedging their bets about an unpredictable UCI.
Re: new Giant, Shiv and P4 UCI illegal? [Tri Slow Poke]
[ In reply to ]
There are 50,000 licensed bicycle racers in the US. There are not many races each year where UCI compliance is required for these racers. But why would one of these racers spend a large sum of money to buy a bike that they might not be able to use at some point in time?
Would it be smart to cut these people out of your demographic? Even if bike racers only buy 10% of TT bikes, do you really want to cut your sales by 10% for no real gain?
Also, how many people watched Cancellara win the Tour prologue and World's TT on his Specialized Shiv vs how many people will watch Chris McCormack race at Kona on his? (Hint, a lot less.)
That is why the bike companies care about UCI compliance.
Kevin
http://kevinmetcalfe.dreamhosters.com
My Strava
Re: new Giant, Shiv and P4 UCI illegal? [Carl]
[ In reply to ]
I don't think you'll see any speculation regarding the TTX or SpeedConcept. Upon careful review, both of those Trek frames pass the UCI guidelines in spirit and in strict accordance.
For those that questioned the Felt TT bikes above, all the current frames we produce in this category (TT/Tri, AR Road, and Tk1) pass the UCI regs for January 1st, 2010 except the Tk1 seatpost which has been redesigned and debuted at this weekends' Elite Track National Championships in the USA.
Carl is right, clarifying and especially the subsequent enforcement of the previous rules should not come as a suprise.
-SD
https://www.kickstarter.com/...bike-for-the-new-era
Re: new Giant, Shiv and P4 UCI illegal? [SuperDave]
[ In reply to ]
Dave...just out of curiosity and since you have a better handle on the UCI regs than I do, but at what point does a "bayonet fork" become a "nosecone"?
http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/
Re: new Giant, Shiv and P4 UCI illegal? [Tom A.]
[ In reply to ]
1. when it is not structural
2. when it exceeds 3:1 in total aspect ratio (including the headtube and external steerer)
3. when it is narrower than 25mm
4. when it is deeper than 80mm including the head tube, excluding the fillet rules.
Just because some of the new nosecones are in fact, structurally part of the stem, or brakes doesn't mean they can avoid rules 2,3, and 4.
Why do you ask, are you making bikes now?
-SD
https://www.kickstarter.com/...bike-for-the-new-era
Re: new Giant, Shiv and P4 UCI illegal? [SuperDave]
[ In reply to ]
In regards to 2 and 4 above, does that mean that the headtube and the external steerer are considered part of the same "fuselage form", even though they move relative to each other?
BTW, how does one apply the 80mm deep "box" in regards to various tubes? is the box centered? Can it be offset to one side? How does one determine where a tube ends and a fillet begins?
I only ask so that I can more intelligently evaluate and discuss various designs...I'm not making any bikes...yet ;-)
http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/
Re: new Giant, Shiv and P4 UCI illegal? [Tom A.]
[ In reply to ]
yes, these parts create one form, one shape, and are under the same guidelines.
The tubes just need to be in the box, it doesn't need to be centered. I know what you are thinking, I checked though, it still doesn't fit.
Good luck with that bike company.
-SD
https://www.kickstarter.com/...bike-for-the-new-era
The tubes just need to be in the box, it doesn't need to be centered. I know what you are thinking, I checked though, it still doesn't fit.
Good luck with that bike company.
-SD
https://www.kickstarter.com/...bike-for-the-new-era
Re: new Giant, Shiv and P4 UCI illegal? [SuperDave]
[ In reply to ]
I appreciate your clarifications as you understand them. Do you care to clarify the ubiquitous fillet rules?
Re: new Giant, Shiv and P4 UCI illegal? [SuperDave]
[ In reply to ]
Thanks Dave...is the "ruling" that they create one form part of the rules (I can't seem to find that part...although, as has been seen earlier in this thread, that doesn't mean it isn't there ;-)...or, is that a "clarification" that has been made to the manufacturers directly?
I'm thinking that with the proliferation of this style of bayonet mount (Look, Felt, etc.) that it might be something they'd want to specifically spell out to remove ambiguity.
On the bike company...of course the first thing is I need a name...with a Germanic last name I was thinking that translating "skunk works" into German might be sort of cool. However, I have a feeling that the "Anhalt Stinktierwerks" isn't quite appealing :-/
Maybe I should just stick to "CheapAssAero and Engineering" ;-)
http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/
Re: new Giant, Shiv and P4 UCI illegal? [Tom A.]
[ In reply to ]
"Non est ad astra mollis e terris via." - Seneca | rappstar.com | FB - Rappstar Racing | IG - @jordanrapp
Re: new Giant, Shiv and P4 UCI illegal? [Rappstar]
[ In reply to ]
LOL!
Tom, is this what you were looking for?
http://www.uci.ch/...NTI0MDY&LangId=1
Sergio
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: English is not my first language. Please read this translated post considering that.
Re: new Giant, Shiv and P4 UCI illegal? [Rappstar]
[ In reply to ]
Like I tell my kids when they mention that they would like to live someplace where it snows...be careful what you wish for ;-)
http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/
Re: new Giant, Shiv and P4 UCI illegal? [Sergio Escutia]
[ In reply to ]
LOL!
Tom, is this what you were looking for?
http://www.uci.ch/...NTI0MDY&LangId=1
Sergio[/reply]
Aaah...yes...I see the part about offset fork designs needing the pivoting section within the 80mm template for the head tube. Thanks!
So, it's not explicitly part of the rules...yet.
You know, nearly everything in that "practical guide" should be included in the rules if that's what they actually intend...
http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/
Re: new Giant, Shiv and P4 UCI illegal? [SuperDave]
[ In reply to ]
But wait...on the "nosecone" bikes (i.e. Giant and Shiv) the part in front of the head tube isn't an "offset fork" since there's a regular steerer tube down the middle of the headtube. Those parts in front are acting as stems and brake mounts and thus are individually constrained to the 3:1 ratio, no?
Or...is that the whole controversy?
http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/
Re: new Giant, Shiv and P4 UCI illegal? [Tom A.]
[ In reply to ]
as I understand the rules and their clarification, the additive aero sections must adhere to both 3:1 and 80mm. Those parts in front may be acting as stems or brake mounts, but I think they still need conformity. Exclusions are on spinning parts that don't always point "into" the wind, and wheels. Cranksets still need to be = or < 80mm AFAIK.
If you move forward with that bike company, I'd recommend a visit to the UCI before you start cutting molds though. Starting over gets costly.
-SD
https://www.kickstarter.com/...bike-for-the-new-era
Re: new Giant, Shiv and P4 UCI illegal? [SuperDave]
[ In reply to ]
Re: new Giant, Shiv and P4 UCI illegal? [Tom A.]
[ In reply to ]
you gonna make some truly aero steel frames? =)
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
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
Re: new Giant, Shiv and P4 UCI illegal? [Tom A.]
[ In reply to ]
Who says it would be molded? :-)[/reply] perhaps I assumed too much. Do you want to make this bike aerodynamic? Commercially viable? and sell more than a few?
https://www.kickstarter.com/...bike-for-the-new-era
Re: new Giant, Shiv and P4 UCI illegal? [SuperDave]
[ In reply to ]
How about aerodynamic and exclusive :-P
Actually...I'd probably make just one for myself...and one for the guy who's dad might make it for me...oh yeah, and one for Jordan too ;-)
http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/
Re: new Giant, Shiv and P4 UCI illegal? [Tom A.]
[ In reply to ]
How about aerodynamic and exclusive :-P
Actually...I'd probably make just one for myself...and one for the guy who's dad might make it for me...oh yeah, and one for Jordan too ;-)[/reply] if it is exclusive, then it isn't UCI legal, and if you are not making it UCI legal, why care about the rules?
https://www.kickstarter.com/...bike-for-the-new-era
I didn't say it couldn't be "marketed" or be "marketable" as the UCI regs require. (It's just that the price might be REALLY, REALLY high...and conditions for sale might be a tad restrictive).
The only reason I'd want to make sure it was UCI compliant is that I might want to do Master Nats on it some day :-)
http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/