Do any of you all think that if a company made an aero "wide" fork that fits your TT/tri bike that people would buy it? If it cost let's say $2k?

I think they would.

Rumor goed that it includes a special travelcase for that price as well. Nothing confirmed yet, but heard this.
If that is a solid case the price for the whole frame kit/bar system is more appealing. Not that it is ‘ cheap’ but a good travel case included softens the price somewhat ;-)

Jeroen

Yes, somewhat. Lol

The Ordu OMX with custom paint is 3800€. In comparison, I really see no reason for the Cervelo P5/PX to be 5300€. Then this Giant is another 1000€ if we pretend the case is worth 700€. It's double what the Ordu costs!

Ordu has hydration and tool storage. Only thing missing is a bento, I guess. I'd mount one BTA if I wanted solids.

No matter how we look at it, +3200€ sure is a lot for a bento. The PX is also much much cheaper and has a bento.

My point was more that Cervelo is already obscenely priced and the Cadex goes far beyond that.

I know these things aren't perfect comparisons, but do put it into perspective: a Kawasaki Ninja 650R costs roughly what a Cadex frame costs, and that one comes with the full "groupset" and wheels. There's even a very large bento under the seat :P Materials cost, manufacturing cost, shipping cost, R&D cost are all in the bicycle's favor. Only economy of scale is in the motorcycle's favor and that won't make up the difference.

Can we agree integrated storage is not worth a 3200€ premium? Or $1500€ over a PX?

Gotta love graphs with unlabeled axes...

Just read the pdf file and you can find it says 47 kmph.

Jeroen

I’m sorry, but they had the bonus of both time and the lack of uci rules…… and came up with…… a slower bike.

What do UCI rules have to do with it? The other two bikes are also not UCI legal designs

Wait, what? This thing is slower than a Canyon (and P5X) unless you're spending all your time at 10+ deg yaw? Why did they even include that chart?

Giant is a unique microcosm that isn't aware of how much the rest of the world understands.
The trinity release data showed the bike to be slower than the P5 and Speed Concept but they came up with a messy way to display it to obfuscate that.

I've digitised this new data so I can model with it.
Using the IMNZ model with 2021 weather for a 4.15 rider (average yaw 1.8deg)
Canyon 17s faster (8 of aero, 9 of mass)
P5X 96s faster (96 of aero, -16 mass)

So clearly the answer for non-UCI is to get a P5X and strip some weight off. Which Cervelo did with the P3X... Best grab one of those while you still can

However, the Cadex does come into its own if you go a lot slower on a really windy day
IMNZ 2019 conditions for a 6.30 rider gave an average yaw of 8.8deg and thus a 34s advantage for the Cadex over the P5X

Of course, independent testing might show a different outcome.

Giant is a unique microcosm that isn't aware of how much the rest of the world understands.
The trinity release data showed the bike to be slower than the P5 and Speed Concept but they came up with a messy way to display it to obfuscate that.

I've digitised this new data so I can model with it.
Using the IMNZ model with 2021 weather for a 4.15 rider (average yaw 1.8deg)
Canyon 17s faster (8 of aero, 9 of mass)
P5X 96s faster (96 of aero, -16 mass)

So clearly the answer for non-UCI is to get a P5X and strip some weight off. Which Cervelo did with the P3X... Best grab one of those while you still can

However, the Cadex does come into its own if you go a lot slower on a really windy day
IMNZ 2019 conditions for a 6.30 rider gave an average yaw of 8.8deg and thus a 34s advantage for the Cadex over the P5X

Of course, independent testing might show a different outcome.

Only because of that P5X rising positive yaw drag, right? If that's not accurate, P5X is faster everywhere

Very interesting, but not a lot of us normal mortals rude 4:15.

But really interested what your software calculates on a IMNZ 5 hr bike ride on the named bikes.