Skippy, Carl, or others. Has anyone confirmed in real life numbers the amount of speed increase that might be available by going from one type of triathlon bike to the new SC? Currently I have the 2006 Scott Plasma 10 and I am thinking of moving up to the Speed Concept based on Trek's white paper report, but was curious to know if the change in the bike by itself would be noticable in the overall speed assuming that the fit is correct. Also, the Trek white paper did not have the Scott Plasma 10 listed so I am not really sure where it falls aerodynamically compared to the SC, I mean, would it be like going from 22mph to 23mph from just a drag perspective for the bike and rider assuming the same power in watts applied?
Triathlon Forum
Login required to started new threads
Login required to post replies
Re: Official Speed Concept Owners Thread [SkippyKitten]
[ In reply to ]
Re: Official Speed Concept Owners Thread [SkippyKitten]
[ In reply to ]
Wow, that is nice!
1) Is that a P1 build?
2) Did those Bont 9.5 wheels come standard or you ordered it separate?
3) Did you have to pay extra to get the 9.5 wheels?
4) Is that a shade or maroon you have on the frame or red (that comes out as maroon because the photo is underexposed?)
.........................__0.............0
...................._.-\ <,_.........</\_
.....~_.o^,....(...)./.(...)......._/\...
1) Is that a P1 build?
2) Did those Bont 9.5 wheels come standard or you ordered it separate?
3) Did you have to pay extra to get the 9.5 wheels?
4) Is that a shade or maroon you have on the frame or red (that comes out as maroon because the photo is underexposed?)
.........................__0.............0
...................._.-\ <,_.........</\_
.....~_.o^,....(...)./.(...)......._/\...
Re: Official Speed Concept Owners Thread [yme]
[ In reply to ]
Unfortunately, it's impossible to give you a number.
However, my 10 mile time dropped a bit over 30s. This was on the same course, within 2 weeks with similar traffic and generally less favourable conditions. That's coming from a Specialized Transition with the same wheels and the same position (as close as possible). Not scientific at all I know!
The Scott is not renowned for being a low drag bike if I remember correctly. Probably 'slower' than a Transition. The Mk2 came out pretty quickly I think....
Developing aero, fit and other fun stuff at Red is Faster
However, my 10 mile time dropped a bit over 30s. This was on the same course, within 2 weeks with similar traffic and generally less favourable conditions. That's coming from a Specialized Transition with the same wheels and the same position (as close as possible). Not scientific at all I know!
The Scott is not renowned for being a low drag bike if I remember correctly. Probably 'slower' than a Transition. The Mk2 came out pretty quickly I think....
Developing aero, fit and other fun stuff at Red is Faster
Re: Official Speed Concept Owners Thread [SkippyKitten]
[ In reply to ]
Skippy, thanks for the information, any information is helpful. It seems like I have seen Scott Plasma drag numbers on ST somewhere, I just can not find it anymore, I am sure that Jack Mott or Tom A. might be able to chime in on the subject with some useful information, at least I hope so.
BTW, the bike looks just awesome, very nice build that is for sure.
BTW, the bike looks just awesome, very nice build that is for sure.
Re: Official Speed Concept Owners Thread [SkippyKitten]
[ In reply to ]
The Junction A will fit with the 100/10 stem. I've got it on mine. Just shove it down into the top tube hole. You can pull it back out easily with tweasers or a spoke.
Re: Official Speed Concept Owners Thread [paxfobiscum]
[ In reply to ]
Thanks, it's starting to look nicer now that the Di2 is on! ;-)
1) It's a P1 (small with Ultegra)
2) I had the 9.0s beforehand and hadn't planned on getting this.
3) The 9.0s are on Project One, so you just pay the difference to upgrade.
4) They're red, it's the lighting that makes them look a bit maroon. The paint is a lot more reflective.
Developing aero, fit and other fun stuff at Red is Faster
1) It's a P1 (small with Ultegra)
2) I had the 9.0s beforehand and hadn't planned on getting this.
3) The 9.0s are on Project One, so you just pay the difference to upgrade.
4) They're red, it's the lighting that makes them look a bit maroon. The paint is a lot more reflective.
Developing aero, fit and other fun stuff at Red is Faster
Re: Official Speed Concept Owners Thread [SkippyKitten]
[ In reply to ]
Any update on availability of new draft box? Love my 9.9 but still struggling with getting storage right and the tire rubbing was making me crazy. Thank you.
Re: Official Speed Concept Owners Thread [sbhno]
[ In reply to ]
According to Carl a few pages back, the revised draft box is shipping now.
Re: Official Speed Concept Owners Thread [yme]
[ In reply to ]
Kind of tenuous comparison but heres one way of looking at it:
Cervelo's data showed the Felt Bayonet 1 bikes to be about 50-125 grams lower in drag depending on yaw than the Plasma 1. (search for the "brain bike" graph"
Trek's data shows a reduction of 75-200 grams going from the Bayonet 1 Felt to the Trek Speed Concept in the earlier testing in the white paper.
So using a Bayonet 1 Felt as the baseline ~100 grams at low yaw angles and ~250 grams at higher yaw between the Trek Speed Concept and the Original Plasma?
Yeah it's tenuous but it's something. The reason the original Plasma isn't on the graph is because most wouldn't consider it an aerodynamic competitor to the SC I don't think. Heck, even the Plasma 2 is at the upper bounds of the bikes shown and it's quite a bit slimmer in frontal profile than the 1.
Cervelo's data showed the Felt Bayonet 1 bikes to be about 50-125 grams lower in drag depending on yaw than the Plasma 1. (search for the "brain bike" graph"
Trek's data shows a reduction of 75-200 grams going from the Bayonet 1 Felt to the Trek Speed Concept in the earlier testing in the white paper.
So using a Bayonet 1 Felt as the baseline ~100 grams at low yaw angles and ~250 grams at higher yaw between the Trek Speed Concept and the Original Plasma?
Yeah it's tenuous but it's something. The reason the original Plasma isn't on the graph is because most wouldn't consider it an aerodynamic competitor to the SC I don't think. Heck, even the Plasma 2 is at the upper bounds of the bikes shown and it's quite a bit slimmer in frontal profile than the 1.
Re: Official Speed Concept Owners Thread [sbhno]
[ In reply to ]
Talk to your dealer, they should be able to submit the warranty claim. I've had the new box for a few weeks. It fits much better.
Craig.
Craig.
Re: Official Speed Concept Owners Thread [CSpread]
[ In reply to ]
Wow! That is a lot of drop!
People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf. George Orwell
People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf. George Orwell
Re: Official Speed Concept Owners Thread [stitchboy]
[ In reply to ]
It's all relative, I suppose. I'm 6'2" and of the long leg/short torso build. Saddle to arm rest drop is 180mm, IIRC.
Craig.
Craig.
Re: Official Speed Concept Owners Thread [SkippyKitten]
[ In reply to ]
Re: Official Speed Concept Owners Thread [johnnyyd]
[ In reply to ]
I'm running a S975 Quarq on my SC and it's been great. I'm using a Joule 2.0 and all is working well.
Re: Official Speed Concept Owners Thread [SkippyKitten]
[ In reply to ]
That is a well staged pic...nice. 100x10 stem setups are my faves for looks.
I've got junction A tucked in there under the stem cover on my 100x10 setup...there's just enough headroom...the bigger challenge was what to do with the connector heading back to the main harness in the frame, since the way I located & oriented junction A left that big connector end almost right at the cable routing opening. Not quite enough length to tuck it in the frame, but not a lot of room in the "hood" for it either...not without resorting to some surgery on that big stiffening rib up in the back of the hood anyway.
In the end, the low stems in particular (50x10 & 100x10) are probably better set up for Di2 with that junction coming out and over the stem cover...perhaps secured with some velcro tape. On all stems it keeps the micro-trim and battery level indicator functionality accessible for those who find themselves wanting/needing them often.
Carl Matson
I've got junction A tucked in there under the stem cover on my 100x10 setup...there's just enough headroom...the bigger challenge was what to do with the connector heading back to the main harness in the frame, since the way I located & oriented junction A left that big connector end almost right at the cable routing opening. Not quite enough length to tuck it in the frame, but not a lot of room in the "hood" for it either...not without resorting to some surgery on that big stiffening rib up in the back of the hood anyway.
In the end, the low stems in particular (50x10 & 100x10) are probably better set up for Di2 with that junction coming out and over the stem cover...perhaps secured with some velcro tape. On all stems it keeps the micro-trim and battery level indicator functionality accessible for those who find themselves wanting/needing them often.
Carl Matson
Re: Official Speed Concept Owners Thread [Carl]
[ In reply to ]
I agree that is a sweet pic.
the 100x10 gives the bike a sick look.
I don't mind the look of my 100x45, but the 100x10 is off the hook.
the 100x10 gives the bike a sick look.
I don't mind the look of my 100x45, but the 100x10 is off the hook.
Re: Official Speed Concept Owners Thread [Carl]
[ In reply to ]
Thanks Carl
I think you've been through the same process i have. Facing one way, the box fits but the connector ends up in a funny place. The other way round and the cabling is fine but it doesn't quite fit under the cap. Nice to know it can be done. I was hoping to get it in the stem and drill 1 or 2 small holes to access the button and LED. This is making a lovely winter project!
As for the photo, I'll take a better one once the Di2 is on.
Developing aero, fit and other fun stuff at Red is Faster
I think you've been through the same process i have. Facing one way, the box fits but the connector ends up in a funny place. The other way round and the cabling is fine but it doesn't quite fit under the cap. Nice to know it can be done. I was hoping to get it in the stem and drill 1 or 2 small holes to access the button and LED. This is making a lovely winter project!
As for the photo, I'll take a better one once the Di2 is on.
Developing aero, fit and other fun stuff at Red is Faster
Re: Official Speed Concept Owners Thread [Carl]
[ In reply to ]
Hello Carl,
I have a question about gearing on the SC 7.0. I noticed that the bike comes equipped with a medium cage Apex rear derailleur. However, if I get this bike, I am interested in upgrading to a short cage Rival unit. The 2010 SRAM Tech Manual indicates that the Rival accommodates the following:
Is there any problem with changing out at the LBS to a short cage Rival for this bike? Since the bike comes with 50/34T chainrings and 11-28T cassette, no alteration of the chainrings or cassette should be needed to maintain within the above specifications of the Rival short cage derailleur; true?
Objective is to get a bit crisper shifting. Expense is that I would not have the flexibility to use a larger rear cassette, but the 34T-28T combo gives a low gear of 31.9", which is plenty low.
Thanks for the all the feedback.
I have a question about gearing on the SC 7.0. I noticed that the bike comes equipped with a medium cage Apex rear derailleur. However, if I get this bike, I am interested in upgrading to a short cage Rival unit. The 2010 SRAM Tech Manual indicates that the Rival accommodates the following:
Total: 33 TThe Manual does not specify whether these specs refer to the short cage or medium cage type, but I am assuming it is the short cage.
Max Sprocket: 28 T
Min Sprocket: 11 T
Front Difference: 16 T
Is there any problem with changing out at the LBS to a short cage Rival for this bike? Since the bike comes with 50/34T chainrings and 11-28T cassette, no alteration of the chainrings or cassette should be needed to maintain within the above specifications of the Rival short cage derailleur; true?
Objective is to get a bit crisper shifting. Expense is that I would not have the flexibility to use a larger rear cassette, but the 34T-28T combo gives a low gear of 31.9", which is plenty low.
Thanks for the all the feedback.
Re: Official Speed Concept Owners Thread [sbhno]
[ In reply to ]
I called Trek today to get the latest on the rear draft box. The guy I talked to said they were in stock, he gave me the part number for my LBS to order (it has to be a warranty claim to get it free) the part number is 420505. I also asked about the top tube draft box and he gave me the part nu,ber for it, 419750, the price is $34.99.
When my LBS called he found out that they had the rear draft boxes and my warranty claim was approved, they also had 3 of the top tube draft boxes in stock. I should have both next week. Merry Christmas to me.
When my LBS called he found out that they had the rear draft boxes and my warranty claim was approved, they also had 3 of the top tube draft boxes in stock. I should have both next week. Merry Christmas to me.
Re: Official Speed Concept Owners Thread [lewis3000us]
[ In reply to ]
Those figures cover the short cage Rival RD. Users report it works, but also that the combination is definitely at the limit with respect to minimum gap between the 28t and jockey pulley.
Carl Matson
Carl Matson
Re: Official Speed Concept Owners Thread [Carl]
[ In reply to ]
Thanks Carl.
Re: Official Speed Concept Owners Thread [Carl]
[ In reply to ]
I am...err...was in the market for a new TT bike. Just read the Trek white paper which was very informative and well written. Thanks to this paper, I probably saved several thousand dollars. Based on my calculations from the data presented, I could expect a savings of less than 3 min over the ironman distance at the yaw angle best favoring the Speed Concept. Based on this, I'll pass on the Speed Concept.
By the way, I'm riding a TTX. Pleasantly surprised at how good of a bike I'm already on.
By the way, I'm riding a TTX. Pleasantly surprised at how good of a bike I'm already on.
Re: Official Speed Concept Owners Thread [CBDiesel]
[ In reply to ]
Happy that you're happy!
Carl Matson
Carl Matson
Re: Official Speed Concept Owners Thread [Carl]
[ In reply to ]
I seem to have the dreaded seatpost slip 'issue'. Twice now I've tried the bike on the turbo and at around 40mins the post started to creep down. I've used a torque wrench and liberal amounts of carbon paste. The bolt seemed to work loose a bit - not sure whether that is an issue with the bolt itself or the post slipping that causes the bolt to undo. I think part of the problem is the design of the clamp which just seems to pinch the seatpost at the front to create friction with the back of the seattube. I had stickers on the seatpost side which marked its theoretical height after measuring my old bike. When the post slid down those stickers did not move from where they were applied which suggests the post isn't actually that tight on the sides of the seat tube. Any suggestions anybody? I thought maybe wrap some thin duct tape around the post - this worked on an old mountain bike with the same problem but the frame/post were aluminium.
The Transition seat post works the same way, only has friction at the very front and back. I used hairspray both on the post and the other parts that clamp against it. It dries to leave a much more matt finish on the surface and completely solved the problem for me with the Transition. I sprayed several coatings on, leaving it to dry in between each one.
My SC9 frameset has apparently arrived in the shop, so I'll soon be finding out for myself if the same technique works with the SC.
My SC9 frameset has apparently arrived in the shop, so I'll soon be finding out for myself if the same technique works with the SC.