They have been up on felt's site for a while as well...

Pretty Launch Page
http://www.feltbicycles.com/frd/#aranchor

White Paper
http://www.feltbicycles.com/...hnical_documents.pdf

Appendix W/ Data & Procedure
http://www.feltbicycles.com/...o_test_procedure.pdf

I certainly appreciate the data, but I wish there would have been some more scenarios covered. Especially a run with water bottles.

But why do you go with EPS over Shimano electronic? Was there that much pressure from potential customers? I work for a Felt retailer and we have NEVER had a question about EPS (except for one customer who is obsessed with Campy).

From an outsider's standpoint it looks like Campy gave them a hell of a deal on EPS to try and get some mindshare and Felt is passing that deal along to the consumer. I would certainly consider doing that if I was in Campy's position of having spent a really long time developing an electronic solution only to have Shimano decimate me in sales of electronic systems.

As Dave said, the EPS bike looks like the best bang for your buck, if you are willing to deal with a system that is even less well known and supported than Di2.

Haha, that is a big IF!

This and the R5 are #1 on my 2014 list, but I am more tempted by the AR FRD frame than any of the bikes, even though the financial side recognizes that buying a frameset is a terrible decision. The EPS is just kind of a dealbreaker. If I had anything else that was Campy it'd be an easy decision, but I do not.

I wonder how bad of a deal the AR FRD frameset really is. Check out the math in this weightweenies post and tell me if you see anything wrong with it (wheels are closer to 2,300 if they are tubular)

http://weightweenies.starbike.com/...p;start=210#p1021065

Considering a new R5 is $5000, and a S5 VWD is $5900 the AR FRD seems like a 'bargain' at $4000. (I choke a little as I type bargain and $4k frameset in the same sentence)

Keep in mind that I think I am safe in saying that the AR is lighter than the S5 VWD and more aero than the R5.

I have no idea what is motivating Felt to price their frameset so competitively, but I am not complaining.

Cervelo, I think, is an anomaly from a frameset pricing standpoint. It's a tough sell for them (to a customer).

More data to prove your point....and lessen my previous point

Specialized SWorks Venge - $3,500
Tarmac SL4 - $3,500
Trek Madone & Series Frameset - $4,399

I think it is safe to say that Cervelo is the outlier.

Yeah, same is true with the P5 -- a complete P5-6 with SRAM Red is $7500 while the P5-6 frameset with handlebars is $7000.

What on earth is Cervelo's motivation for this? It obviuosly costs them a LOT more than $500 build it out w/ SRAM Red and throw some training wheels on it. Anybody got any thoughts?

---

-Stephen in Arkansas

? I don't understand the question. We do use Shimano Di2. We have the Ultegra and Dura-Ace versions on the AR2 and AR FRD respectively. Like the rest of the industry we'll wait another couple months for Shimano to start delivery of Ultegra 6870 11 speed Di2. With the Athena EPS version we can produce the bikes today (actually starting last summer) and produce them at a more affordable price point than Shimano can offer.

We don't force one bike over the other, you can have either. AR3 EPS now or AR2 w/ Di2 in a couple months. It is noteworthy that it is Shimano, not Felt who is delaying the Utegra Di2. So while some dealers have to wait for their "affordable" electric shifted FOIL, Venge, Giant, and Cervelo, Felt dealers can sell a bike today.

-Dave

---

https://www.kickstarter.com/...bike-for-the-new-era

Dave,
Have Felt demo days been planned yet? I live in the Bay area
Thx

Check with your local Felt Dealer or ping our FB page. Or if you'd like to send me an email I can forward it onto the regional tech rep, Karl with a K.

-SD

---

https://www.kickstarter.com/...bike-for-the-new-era

Dave - do you have approximate frameset (or frame) weights for the aluminum/AR15 version?

Frameset? 2000g.

Dave

---

https://www.kickstarter.com/...bike-for-the-new-era

Hi Dave,

after seeing the above picture of AR1 frame set on your website, i immediately ordered it at my LBS in pasadena.

however after browsing the web, i see there is another white logo color scheme for AR1.
shown below.

Which version am I going to get? please tell me its the one above!!

thanks!

Daniel Lin

The one above is correct for consumers. Some sponsored professionals get the one with white decals for visibility in action photography.

-SD

---

https://www.kickstarter.com/...bike-for-the-new-era

Thanks Dave,

another Question?

Will my standard SRAM RED rear brake fit on the bike?
or do i need to find dual pivot brake like one shown below?

A standard SRAM RED caliper is too wide to fit between the crank arms. Even if you could mount it to the underside of the frame, pedaling the bike would cause interference.

Shimano Dura-Ace, Ultegra, 105, TRP T750 and T740 as well as EEcycleworks have rear brakes that fit the Shimano direct-mount standard.

-SD

---

https://www.kickstarter.com/...bike-for-the-new-era

Dave,

Would the Omega SV work under there?

Direct mount is different than the V brake mounts for the SV.

Nick can chime in on his plans but not currently.

---

https://www.kickstarter.com/...bike-for-the-new-era

Wind tunnel testing is only the first stage to getting more aero (faster), but the AR is not a track bike but a road bike where things don't stay constant for long. Just look at F1 this year and McLaren, they know a thing or two about aerodynamics but it is what the drivers can do with the car on a track in race conditions that really counts. Their wind tunnel data not delivering the performance gains expected. Road bikes need to take corners, spring up climbs, descend like a comet while maintaining control etc etc. So what would be nice now is taking some semi pros and do testing with different bikes and power metres to gage the effort for those results. This would be solo efforts of a fixed course and in group race conditions. Maybe even put some clip-ons and get a do some short time trials using different bikes and testers, as I suspect a good percentage of people buying an aero bike are looking to save having to buy a full on TT bike. Then we can really understand if the Felt can delivers on what looks like a great bike.
Personally I would really like to understand if buying a Canyon SLX 7.0 Ultegra 11speed weighing 6.7kg is quicker, slower or similar than the new Felt AR 4 which weighs over a kilo more. Similar costs to buy the bikes but does a non-aero Pro level frame beat an aero bike (new Felt AR4) under road conditions. Will the aero compensate for the extra weight? Different question to what is the best aero road bike is, but surely the question is what the best road bike is. Hills exist, road surfaces vary and being able to sprint at the end of a race to win are all important aspects road bike need to deal with. I wonder what Felt would recommend to get their new AR4 down close to the UCI weight limit, even the AR2 would need to shed a bit of weight. Consumers’ need to know what they get for their hard earned money. I wish we could move away from theory and move more to real world tests as crude as they may seem.

You've just listed about 5 subjective metrics that can be debated endlessly. How could Felt possibly claim their bike is better in "group race conditions" than another? Shedding weight from an AR4? Wheels are certainly a way of doing so. Would a pair of R-sys wheels make the bike faster? That is difficult to say, it would depend on the conditions it was being used.

The bikes are real world tested, these are not first attempts that get released to the public, they are the 6th or 7th version of the tube shapes, there have been countless lay up revisions and the AR has been raced at the Cat 1,2 level in the USA since early July to aid the balance of performance and comfort requirements. If you wanted a lighter bike Felt also makes the F4 with Ultegra or the Z4 if you're looking for more compliance or F3x if you have a dirty mind or B12 if you wanted a TT/Tri option, or...

I think you're are actually suggesting a move toward theory and subjectivity and not analytic evaluations of the product.

-SD

---

https://www.kickstarter.com/...bike-for-the-new-era

Thanks for responding; for me it shows why I should buy a Felt over the competition. The reason for such a large number of subject matter is the failure of magazines to come up with a way of getting past the marketing engines of the other brands out there. And your right it would be endless as someone will always think of another test that they would like carried out. The faster question as you rightly state is dependent on race conditions. My challenge is to testers/magazines to come up with a range of conditions to test bikes over. Hopefully this would highlight the strength and weakness of the bikes they test and which ones are good for a variety of conditions. There simple scoring metrics do not give some bikes the credit they deserve or reward the effort manufacturers put in to make their bikes for specific conditions.
To show how good a bike is in race conditions is very difficult as so much depends on the riders. My suggestion would be for testers to measure the watts required to stay in the pack during a race, to see if any go faster technology helps reduce the effort to stay in the group and therefore fresher to contest the win. The comfort level is much harder to test but maybe an accelerometer could measure road vibration. For testing the winning sprint perhaps take the bike to a velodrome and do a kind of keirin. So one bike at a time following the motor pacing to get the bike up to speed and then see what is the maximum speed riders can do on the final lap and the wattage they can put down. Perhaps all testing will show just how important the engine on the bike is rather than the bike.
That said the wind tunnel results for the AR show it should be much better in a TT than an ordinary road bike. I would hope that testers could find a club willing to test aero bikes with clip-on tri bars, on a fairly flat course. This test alone should show that an AR is far superior to the competition. This would make all those potential customers looking for a good road bike that can double up for an occasional club TT when required consider the Felt AR.
Thanks for clarify your testing (nicely put me in my place) and the choice of bikes Felt have. The other bikes are clear for intended purpose and I would love to buy one of each of the bikes in your range. I feel (which is where I could be going wrong) that Aero road bikes fall into a bit of a ‘do it all’ category and all the Strava KOM chasers, occasional club TT riders, part time road racers would consider a Felt AR; with Cat1,2 racers looking at the top end Felt AR to get the Flet AR down to the UCI weight limit.
Yes I am probably suggesting a move towards theory and subjectivity but with the available analytic evaluations of this subjectivity. A wind tunnel is not a true test of the product under actual conditions, just a good start. There is a balance to be struck and with power meters hopefully some balance could be made; as road bikes are intended to be ridden by people on roads and need to cope with the changing conditions this gives. Just going down the analytical route could give you a F1 McLaren which should be fast for its intended purpose but is not fast enough this season. Fortunately, as you highlighted, you have tested at Cat 1 and 2 as well. As mention my challenge is more for the testers and magazines to show the conditions that the Flet AR really shines in. Personally I am glad to see such passion and clever design from Felt to produce the AR. It is certainly a bike I am seriously thinking of buying and I am sure lots of other are, who may have not previously been thinking of buying a Felt. Hopefully Felt can have the same success as Apple, where their passion and good design has got them to be top dog.

Hey Dave, crazy excited for the Felt AR FRD in a 56 I've ordered at my bike shop in MD.

Any idea of a timeline? I was originally quoted late December.

As for my .02, I work in the medical device industry and one of the ways that I try to do right by my customers is in trying to get my company to sponsor studies relevant to a particular practice or area of expertise for a given customer. However, most often these studies don't happen because the company is not willing to sponsor a study that they won't control the results of. If such and such study makes their product look bad, they don't want it to be released in environments where you can't control so many intangibles.

For instance, let's say that there is a high incidence of infection in patients that are treated with a certain product. Well it can be extremely difficult to determine if that product is the cause of the high infection rate in the hospital environment, there are simply too many factors to consider but if that is in the reporting of the study then competitors can take hold of that misinformation and use it against you.

Control is so important in doing these studies especially for somethign with such a tiny sample size over such a short time line.

Over years and years a body of data can be gathered that can account for such variability but that rarely makes sense for marketing purposes.