In before Tom A. comes on here and destroy's the thread and tells us all how Gerard is wrong about everything.

---

Make Inside Out Sports your next online tri shop! http://www.insideoutsports.com/

If he disagrees with the premise, I do not think it could be considered ruining the thread. He would have valid points, I am sure. I would be interested in hearing them.

---

-------------
Ed O'Malley
www.VeloVetta.com
Founder of VeloVetta Cycling Shoes
Instagram • Facebook

yeah but the Speed Concept is narrow and Gerard is wrong and brakes are integrated!

Ok last comment of making fun of it. I eagerly await the anti-disc brake comments.

I am curious to see how other manufacturers clean up the head tube area.

---

Make Inside Out Sports your next online tri shop! http://www.insideoutsports.com/

I don't think that the presence of a rim brake on the fork crown was a limiter to head tube height. For example, the Cervelo P4 had a much shorter head tube than either the P5 or the P5x. My personal opinion is that the main reason that head tubes aren't as short as they could be (or were, in the case of the P4 -> P5) is that most people just can't/won't ride that low and don't want a crapload of spacers on their brand new superbike. This leaves those that can legitimately take advantage of a really long/low position out in the cold.

Not head tube height, fork crown height.

---

-------------
Ed O'Malley
www.VeloVetta.com
Founder of VeloVetta Cycling Shoes
Instagram • Facebook

Right, but if I understood your comment correctly you're seeing this as an enabler to lower overall stack height and I don't think overall stack height was limited by the presence of a rim brake. Whatever additional fork crown height there was for the brake can easily be accomodated by a shorter head tube. I think the stack heights you see on current bikes are a function of market demographics vs. some sort of technical limiter based on the presence or absence of a front rim brake.

Most of the time you bring the drama yourself. Its getting a bit old.

You can block my posts if you wish :)

---

Make Inside Out Sports your next online tri shop! http://www.insideoutsports.com/

I think Gerard is right but with a significant caveat. First, no matter what you do, you still need to have fork blades that are long enough to give good tire clearance, depending on the purpose of the frame. If the disc frame is essentially the same size (regarding the rider contact points) as the rim brake frame, yes, a disc brake bike could allow one to virtually eliminate the crown area of the fork. BUT that frontal area is not truly eliminated, instead it is replaced with a longer head tube. So then, the question is, is this replacement of one thing for another thing a benefit aerodynamically, or a wash, or an aero disadvantage? The answer to that is, 'it depends'. It depends on the size and shape of what was there previously, and the size and shape of what you replace it with.

If you look at what a Trek SC does with its front brake, you can get of an idea of what can be done with a pretty close to optimal (aero-wise) rim brake system. Can an optimal disc system beat this aerodynamically (after factoring in the impact of a disc hub, the braking rotor, the brake caliper mech, and the extra spokes needed)? Maybe, but we haven't seen it yet.

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

yeah, its hard to imagine the basic shape getting much better than the likes of the SC, though of course you can clean up all the little breaks in shape the brakes require.
certainly disc brakes do open up some new options for frame and fork design. it will be interesting to see what designers do with that freedom and whether it makes any significant difference. thus far at least, i don't think we're seeing anything inventive but its early days yet

Original Specialized Transition Carbon did that.

---

Developing aero, fit and other fun stuff at Red is Faster

I'm not sure that the full amount of height you can take out of the fork crown has to go into the head tube.

I think El Gato may have hit the nail on the head - bike manufacturers are not interested in making long & low frames because most people who are buying the bikes don't want a pro bike position.

I thought I might prove this wrong by showing that head tube lengths in new superbikes do not get much shorter as the bike size goes down, but I was wrong. Looking at Felt IA geometry, the stack to reach ratio was actually higher for the 54 than the 48.

---

-------------
Ed O'Malley
www.VeloVetta.com
Founder of VeloVetta Cycling Shoes
Instagram • Facebook

Actually, unless you fundamentally change the rider's contact points or change the frame geometry (change the head tube shape/profile, or lower the top tube, or lower the BB, or do a combination of things, etc), it kinda does.

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

True - I'm assuming if you made a shorter head tube + fork crown combo in order to make a shorter stack bike you would also move the top tube down.

But that might all be academic.

---

-------------
Ed O'Malley
www.VeloVetta.com
Founder of VeloVetta Cycling Shoes
Instagram • Facebook

I think Gerard may be exaggerating a bit (and/or not telling the whole story - see DarkSpeedWorks response above)...then again, the event he was at was a marketing function, right? ;-)

---

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

So, a pre-emptive destruction by you then? Not surprised...

---

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

Assuming Gerard is exaggerating and it’s just marketing? Not surprised at all.

It would be cool if he posted on here again.

---

Make Inside Out Sports your next online tri shop! http://www.insideoutsports.com/

"...nearly completely sucked into the head tube..." Do you mean like what he did on the Strada? Do you notice how wide the bottom of the head tube got after the crown was "sucked in"??



So...how much more "sucked in" is that crown than the crown on the fork I just put in place on my own bike (which happens to be designed for mid-reach brakes):

Not much...another 5-10mm maybe (if that)?

Of course, from an aerodynamic point of view, and looking at "best in class", how does the Strada compare to the front of a Speed Concept?


Heck, even the front of a Madone doesn't look much different (to the air, especially) than the front of the Strada:


So...that shape is either going to be part of the crown or part of the head tube. As long as the crown (and brake) are incorporated and/or shaped well, aerodynamically it's no difference.

So yeah:
- slight exaggeration
- marketing point

It's not that hard to figure out really...

---

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

I'm sure the reason he was there was for marketing purposes - but he did it in the best possible way. There was really no selling of products. Lots of funny self-deprecating (but ultimately impressive) stories about his career. His thoughts on where bike technology is going.

He really stressed that the features he is currently incorporating into bikes - 1x and disc brakes - are not intended to be the best solution for every cyclist. Just the best solution for his customers.

When asked "why disc brakes?" his first response was from the perspective of gravel bikes, which is really where it seems his passion is now. It was to easily accommodate anything from a typical road racing wheel to a 650B mountain bike wheel with minimal changes or adjustments in the same bike.

When asked more specifically "why disc brakes on the strada?" He mentioned the same things that typically get panned on here: 1) better braking 2) better wheel shapes 3) We can make it just as aerodynamic - for instance we can basically eliminate the height of the fork crown

While I disagree with most of his points on disc brakes on an aero road bike, I found the fork crown comment interesting and new to me. In general I found the event highly entertaining. His stories about the beginning of his career and how he ended up with their first pro tour team sponsorship were great. He is definitely not a "business guy" and hated running Cervelo. That's why he has committed to Open having no more than two employees, including himself. He wants to do nothing but ride and design bikes. Leave all the rest of it to someone else. He said he hates people and hates managing people even more.

When asked what bike of his design is his favorite of all time, he said the P4 - partly because everyone else hates it. ST's own doublea334 had his there on display behind Gerard during his talk.

---

-------------
Ed O'Malley
www.VeloVetta.com
Founder of VeloVetta Cycling Shoes
Instagram • Facebook

Which is a legit reason for an "all surface" bike, and something I've actually done as well for that purpose. That said, that's no reason for a road racing bike to have them...and it's definitely not one for a TT/Tri bike.


Hmmm...that's an interesting insight...

---

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

And he might have said "mostly" because everyone else hates it... Can't quite remember. But that's the only reason he gave. That and he thought it still looks good.

---

-------------
Ed O'Malley
www.VeloVetta.com
Founder of VeloVetta Cycling Shoes
Instagram • Facebook

In regards to your "Can an optimal disc system beat..." I was watching a GTN video where the host was riding a P5X and the guy he was interviewing was on the new BMC, which I think has a similar fort crown to the SC. I never realized how clean and narrow the P5x head tube and fork crown are. Very smooth and tiny looking compared to the BMC. When I saw that video I finally understood Vroomen's comment about the advantage of moving the brake away from the fork crown. Maybe the comparison you should be making is the SC and something like the Felt track bike to see what eliminating the brake from the design equation could look like.

P.S. I am not a disc fan and I ride an SC, so I consider myself pretty neutral on the subject.

Wouldn't direct mount rim brake also eliminate any requirements in terms of fork crown height?

I don't think so. The mounting points have to be high enough so the pads are at the brake track, so the pivot usually has to be at or above the tire. Then there is more brake above that, of course.

---

-------------
Ed O'Malley
www.VeloVetta.com
Founder of VeloVetta Cycling Shoes
Instagram • Facebook