Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: 2014 Speed Concept? [MTM] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
MTM wrote:
www.uci.ch/includes/asp/getTarget.asp?type=FILE&id=ODQ1NzE‎

Page 14.

Thanks for that link,

Cheers Noel,
Quote Reply
Re: 2014 Speed Concept? [Zipp] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
all the extensions except the Ergo short are the same length ...so going straight sticks won't save you anything . for identical pad stack you would need to run a10 mm shorter monospacer. while you may have room to cut more length off, beyond the trim length we designed in , you would void your warranty and there is no guarantee your shifters would still fit. the inner diameter is only controlled beyond the trim section by about 35mm...just enough for the longest shifter mounts (sram, last I knew).

Carl Matson
Quote Reply
Re: 2014 Speed Concept? [Carl] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Thanks Carl,I will stick the tape on it again tomorrow and see what I need if I trim back the end of the extension's to the trim line, would you have a part no for the shorter mono spacer's say in 15mm and 25mm ? The 80mm from center of bb suits me better now anyway

Has anyone Any idea on how much the shorter stems are ? Just a looking to get a idea on what the cost of changing would be,

Cheers Noel,
Quote Reply
Re: 2014 Speed Concept? [Zipp] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
9-series bikes come with the full set of monospacers, so you should already have them...but more to the point, from your question I take it you're already running one of the higher spacers, either the 35mm or 45mm...in which case you could've hit the same pad position with one of the Medium (height) stems and the lowest monospacer...and the reach difference between the medium-near & medium-far combined with the allowable mono cut length should get you where you want to be.

Carl Matson
Quote Reply
Re: 2014 Speed Concept? [Carl] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Hi Carl


I'm riding a SC7 size S with a 100mm stem.


Pad reach:490mm
Pad stack:590mm
Basebar reach:640mm
Basebar stack:510mm
Saddle height from BB:730mm
Sattle is 10mm behind the BB

I'm planning to order new SC9.
I currently assume size M with low-far stem is the right for me.
What do you suggest?


I saw Dirk Bockel is not using the normal extensions. Is there any special clamp available
to mount others that the originals extensions?
http://triathlon.competitor.com/...-speed-concept_85967


Thanks for your help.
Nic


Last edited by: Nic.Run: Oct 30, 13 5:24
Quote Reply
Re: 2014 Speed Concept? [Nic.Run] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I think I come to the same conclusion on frame and stem size. Technically, you could also be on a small with the low-far and max spacer stack...or medium-far and slammed...but you're at one or the other limit with those before you'd have to change stems. The medium frame & low-far stem is more versatile from a position tweak standpoint and your saddle height is within normal range for either frame size.

As for what Dirk was riding in Kona...best I can do right now is say stay tuned for later this winter.

Carl Matson
Quote Reply
Re: 2014 Speed Concept? [Carl] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
On size M with low stem and min spacer when using Di2 junction box, then it seems that it will not be able to move the mono-extension backwards as
it would touch the junction box. This reduces the range for adjustment. I'm currently using s-bends, but I plan to go for a ergo mono.
This makes the sizing more critical I think.
The back of my arm pads(120mm length) to BB are 430mm. Back of pad to extension begin is 330mm(elbow to wrist is 270mm).
My LBS does not have the frames, stems in stock for testing.





Quote:
As for what Dirk was riding in Kona...best I can do right now is say stay tuned for later this winter.


Maybe with this solution it will give me more range. Would make sense to shift the order until this solution is official or going with s-bends?

Nic
Last edited by: Nic.Run: Oct 30, 13 5:40
Quote Reply
Re: 2014 Speed Concept? [Nic.Run] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I am in the same boat as you but I purchased my bike already and bought the straight extensions and S-Bends as well as the stock ergo-bend... I've tried them all and am having trouble getting any of them to work for me. Hopefully this fix that's in the works can be retrofitted to the existing bars.
Quote Reply
Re: 2014 Speed Concept? [Nic.Run] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Hey Carl,

I ordered my 7.5 and my LBS said that it might not be there until Feb. or March. Does this sound about right?

Thanks for all the great information.
Quote Reply
Re: 2014 Speed Concept? [Nic.Run] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Based on the #s you mention, I believe the short ergo would accommodate your position and eliminate the overhang issue. Since all of the other extension shapes are the same length as the long ergo I don't see anything changing were you to try a different one. Wouldn't expect the plug'n'play to change it either. Otherwise, the junction box could also be mounted to the back of the mono with Shimano's stock mounting hardware.

Carl Matson
Quote Reply
Re: 2014 Speed Concept? [brooks5656] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Hi brooks

Lead times aren't set in stone...we'll always try to reduce the effect of factors we control, but any number of things out of our control can change the dates one direction or the other as well. Your dealer is almost always going to have better/more up to date info on availability than I am...it can also vary quite a bit by location even within the US (which is the only set of warehouses I can "see").

Carl Matson
Quote Reply
Re: 2014 Speed Concept? [brooks5656] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Stock 7.5 will be end of Feb.
If you go via P1 the 7.5 will take about 30days
Quote Reply
Re: 2014 Speed Concept? [Carl] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I thought when using the s-bend, I could shorten the extensions, avoiding to set the mono backwards.
Quote Reply
Re: 2014 Speed Concept? [Nic.Run] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
you can, by as much as 35-40mm...but the short ergo is another 40mm shorter still.

Carl Matson
Quote Reply
Re: 2014 Speed Concept? [Carl] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Carl wrote:
9-series bikes come with the full set of monospacers, so you should already have them...but more to the point, from your question I take it you're already running one of the higher spacers, either the 35mm or 45mm...in which case you could've hit the same pad position with one of the Medium (height) stems and the lowest monospacer...and the reach difference between the medium-near & medium-far combined with the allowable mono cut length should get you where you want to be.

Hi Carl,
At the moment I have the low far stem with the 15mm mono spacer,I have the other 3 spacers also,it looks good as it is and it was only to get it into the UCI legal bb to tip of shifters I had the prob,there is 25mm to the trime line so ill only by about 5mm over the 80cm limit for 2014, if I was to get the low med stem I take it that would sort my prob,

Thanks Noel,
Quote Reply
Re: 2014 Speed Concept? [Carl] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Hi Carl

I received my 9 series frame and am about to order a 9070 group. Other than the obvious parts and internal battery, are there any speed concept specific di2 9070 parts that I need to order?

Thanks!

Jason

Toro Performance
Quote Reply
Re: 2014 Speed Concept? [jbird2131] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
internal battery bracket, w332400, and you should be set from the frame side.

Carl Matson
Quote Reply
Re: 2014 Speed Concept? [Zipp] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
low-near stem, and yes, that should do it if you're that close right now.

Carl Matson
Quote Reply
Re: 2014 Speed Concept? [Carl] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Carl,

You have already replied about this question from the other thread and I understand on how to use the fit table, but still can't get that grasp in understanding the differences between the 3 categories on the fit table: Mid-Pad, Pad-Range, and Full-Range. Can you explain what is the difference between the 3 categories or can you point me to the documentation on the Trek website where they explain this? I am trying to get the last detail that I need, to make a decision on my bike purchase. Thanks for the help.

Tarochi
Quote Reply
Re: 2014 Speed Concept? [Tarochi] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Step one of using the fit chart is finding your pad reach, and where you find it determines which frame and stem combinations will work for your fit coordinates.


  • Mid-Pad: will drive you towards a frame and stem combo which pretty much centers your pads over the basebar.
  • Pad-Range: similar to mid-pad, but accounts for the full adjustment of the pad by itself (i.e. how far can the pad go, forward and backward, without making any other adjustment like moving the pad wing or sliding the mono)
  • Full-Range: shows you how far the system can go in both directions, again using the basebar as the center of the range
What would you use and why?


  • Mid-Pad: where everyone should start, and where most people will finish. That is to say, the frame-stem combo you get by using this pad reach range is appropriate for most people most of the time
  • Pad-Range: usually comes into play when the answer you got by using mid-pad includes basebar stack and/or reach numbers which you don't like...by using pad-range you open up the possibilities for finding a frame-stem combos which better matches your basebar location preference.
  • Full-Range: this takes pad-range to the extremes, to handle the surprisingly large range of fit coordinates that actually exist out in the real world (contrary to what some mfr's would have you believe). If you and/or your fitter determine that the best pad position for you is well outside of ST-norms, we're not here to judge...we're here to find an SC combo that works for you. An example would be someone plugs their pad reach into "mid-pad" or even "pad-range" and finds no solution (i.e. reach is pointing to one frame size and pad stack points to another). It can also be used to deal with extreme cases of the basebar location scenario I mention in pad-range above.


Carl Matson
Last edited by: Carl: Oct 31, 13 9:16
Quote Reply
Re: 2014 Speed Concept? [Carl] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Carl,

This information is what I am looking for. Thank you for the detailed explanation.

Tarochi
Quote Reply
Re: 2014 Speed Concept? [Carl] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Useful would be the reach length-range of the mono-extensions depending on the frme size and stem length.
When selecting frame size and stem using the fitguide-chart, I don't know, what range the extensions have.
Regarding the capability to cut of the extensions is limited I think this is important when determining the correct frame and stem in especially when at one or the other limit.
Quote Reply
Re: 2014 Speed Concept? [Nic.Run] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Appreciate the feedback, Nic. You make a good point.

Carl Matson
Quote Reply
Re: 2014 Speed Concept? [Carl] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Carl wrote:
low-near stem, and yes, that should do it if you're that close right now.

That's great,thanks,
Quote Reply
Re: 2014 Speed Concept? [Carl] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Carl,

The shop has a medium 2014 SC 9.5 and we measured it today with Medium Far stem and it matches the fit table where it is going to work but adjustability to lower the stack is limited. This confirmed that the size small with Medium Far stem will work for me. The dilemma is the basebar because I am somewhat reaching when I am on the basebar on the medium. And looking on the size small with medium far basebar reach and stack I might be still reaching because my basebar reach is 555mm and stack is 580mm. Will this be an issue with size small and medium far stem?
Quote Reply

Prev Next