This is exciting news. Where do I get in line?

This bike will be the first one to go below the 300gF of drag mark at yaw

---

http://cds-0.blogspot.com

?

been there done that...InsideTri shootout @FASTER



the Cervelo P4 article on this site




don't need a new bike to do that ;-)

---

Carl Matson

Can someone please just link a picture (and not put it inline)!

All I want is 1 picture!

Side note: there aren't many 2013 SC's left in Trek warehouses (this actually goes for a lot of the high-end bikes that run lower production numbers than the more popular bikes ridden by a larger segment of the population). I'd have to imagine a release coming soon. I can't even find the 9.9 in Dexter at the moment (F/S or complete bike). Usually the qty just goes to zero and the bike stays in the system for a bit.

---

__________________________

I tweet!

this work for you: https://pbs.twimg.com/...wrCcAAe38L.png:large

I haven't seen InsideTri data. If I remember well the lowest drag of SC with a 808 FC/Disc combo was in the range of 320-350gF in both ENVE Smart and Trek white papers

So this could be the first bike that gives consistently <300gF values

Carl, how far of thrust at yaw do you think we are?

---

http://cds-0.blogspot.com

http://tinypic.com/r/fwgad/5

"all you have to do is..."

put on a disk and make the rider & componentry disappear. an SC7 with nothing on it but a pair of A9 D3 tubies went to zero (ref D3 white paper, p22 fig 22).

for any number of reasons, I think the rider becomes the limiter in a pursuit of the zero-drag bike-only system...whether it's the accommodation of a reasonable number of rider positions...or design considerations which minimize/improve upon rider-bike aero interaction...or what have you.

---

Carl Matson

Carl is right on with this statement.

In fact, some bikes intentionally take a "hit" in increased aero drag when tested without a rider... in order to lower the drag on the bike+rider system even more. For example, refer to the Cervelo P5 white paper, Figure 14 on page 11.

Cheers,

---

Damon Rinard
Engineering Manager,
CSG Road Engineering Department
Cannondale & GT Bicycles
(ex-Cervelo, ex-Trek, ex-Velomax, ex-Kestrel)

that design, I would assume should be towards campy or shimano...that's not really trek's territory, don't u think?

God Bless America.

---

__________________________

I tweet!

I assume you mean Shimano / Campy's design of the brake calipers found in road bikes and a vast majority of older type Tri bikes.

Note that Trek's speed concept have brake calipers integrated into the fork and the bottom bracket. The integrated front caliper in the SC fork allows for adjustability at its "ears" and this allows for various rim width sizes. Unfortunately, the integrated rear brake caliper located at the bottom bracket does not have an option to adjust for various rim width sizes. As such, the standard suggestions have been to change the washers at the brake shoes when using different wheels. Otherwise, one has to loosen / tighten the rear brake cable. Trek / bontrager came out with the design (although not originally their idea) of adjusting the brake tension at the brake lever (which you are referring to in the picture). That would be perfect if you are open to using any standard aero brake lever type. It certainly solves the rim width conundrum.

HOWEVER, for Di2 users like myself, we are stuck with having to use just the Di2 brake lever, which does not have the brake cable adjustability you refer to. Hence my suggestion remains the same.

.

---

.........................__0.............0
...................._.-\ <,_.........</\_
.....~_.o^,....(...)./.(...)......._/\...

Gotcha! It must be tough when you get 'stuck' with Di2.

The new frame looks like the Trek SC, BMC TM01 and Scott Plasma Premium had a threesome and this was the offspring.

I like it!

---

Favorite Gear: Dimond | Cadex | Desoto Sport | Hoka One One

There is definitely more material around the BB in this new model, and a new design where the seat stays meat the seat tube that is more like the current S5/P5/Plasma/Felt. Fork looks marginally different as well, and possible a Shiv-TT like ridge on the downtube behind the fork crown. Quite a bit more change that I was assuming from the original Lieto photo.

Chris

I hope they have a solution in mind for a BTA bottle/hydration system.

I can already see all the "How do you carry water on the new SC?" threads now.


Also, they learned from the first SC and got rid of the seat post wedge, and went with a rear clamp system like the P5 and others.

Does this help?
[http://www.cyclingnews.com/...-7/photos/272460/url]

Doesn't look too radically different to me. A little more carbon above the BB and a smother transition from stem to top tube. The new bars look interesting though. I like the idea of only one armrest spacer stack.

The fork/headtube junction and seat stay cluster look markedly improved.

That's a good point about an upfront hydration solution. Those "forked tongue" aerobars are going to pose a problem in that regard. Looks like a Torhans "might" fit in there. I can't imagine Trek overlooked that piece of the puzzle.

I'm glad that seat post wedge is gone. I'm on seat post #3 (I cracked one by tightening the bolt too much, and by too much I mean nowhere near the torque max, and the LBS cracked another one by doing the exact same thing). Both were warranty issues so it didn't cost me a dime but when the thing states 7.2 Nm max and you torque it to 5 Nm and it still cracks the seat post there's an inherent design flaw.

Looking forward to Herbert doing some photo essay on it.

Carl still hasn't chimed in. C'mon, Carl. Give us some tidbits!

---

Favorite Gear: Dimond | Cadex | Desoto Sport | Hoka One One

Yeah I can't imagine they overlooked it either. It would be upsetting if they did.

That or they are in cahoots with x-lab to show us some compelling data that a two bottle behind the seat system is better than BTA this new handlebar system.