kileyay wrote:
littlefoot wrote:
P4 huh, how many bikes did you ride this year? I saw you did some aero testing, but didn't expect for you to be riding that. What made you go for this?
Sexy bike by the way.
Thank you -- I was really happy with how it came out and have been messing with it for a few weeks, finally finishing it up on Christmas day.
In 2017 I rode a Felt B2 for all races except one local Olympic for which I used the TriRig Omni, which I did not own but was testing for a review. I also owned a Diamondback Andean but I could never get that bike to work for me and returned it.
All these bikes had or have problems. I have never had a TT bike that I truly loved and could say flat out is a forever bike. I have a forever mountain bike, forever gravel bike, forever fat bike, and based on my experience thus far with the 3T Strada,
maybe my forever aero road bike. But I just can't seem to find the proper balance among TT bikes between fit, performance, ease of ownership, etc., and yet is the bike I ride the most. I have owned something like 8 TT bikes and tested a couple more and they all suck. So this fall I resolved that 2017 will be the year that I find my forever TT bike. Then I'm just going to sell the others.
But why the P5? Well, the aero testing taught me that the P4 is probably the fastest bike ever made. The differences in aero drag between the P4 (from other testing) and between the P5 and P5-X (from our testing) are
so minute that the weight differences in those respective bikes almost entirely bridge the aero gap. The P5-X is no faster than the P5 and the P5 is no faster than the P4.
Besides that, I have long been forced to use an undermount bar setup in order to hit my fit coordinates, and I hate that undermount setup. Besides the fact that it's probably slow, it's ugly and prevents normal BTA configurations, etc. Moreover, many of the latest and greatest bars are overmount only, like the PD Aeria Ultimate. Aside from the Neil Pryde frame, the 51 cm Cervelo P4 is the only frame that allows me to use most modern bars and to use overmount configuration while still hitting my numbers. The way it is built now is the lowest stack I have ever ridden at 542, and my extensions are above the bar. It's amazing. The pad-center reach is 500 and I will need to go longer by 5-10 mm.
Basically, this is not only probably the fastest bike I could build for myself but also the best fitting one. There are drawbacks, like the world's worst ever rear (rim) brake. No bike is perfect.
There's one other contender for me, which I also bought this off season at a banging price, is the Trek Speed Concept. I will build this up soon.
Aside from that, the new TriRig Alpha X extension clamp accommodation will allow me to use an "in line" setup where the extensions are neither over or below the bar. I plan to buy that front end and hardware and sell the Enve front end that is on my Felt B Series.
So in 2017 I will own three TT bikes: the Felt B Series with TriRig Alpha X; the P4; and Trek SC7. What I am preparing to do is find out which one I actually want to keep. I toyed with the idea of taking them to the tunnel to tease out aero differences, but why? They are almost surely so damn close that the totality of other factors between them would become the arbiter. And then I've spent days of my life driving this shit down to Mooresville and thousands of dollars to find out what I already know, which is that it doesn't make much difference at all when you have these amazing machines set up really well.
Longer term, I want a TT bike with rim brakes -- my forever rim-braking TT bike -- and a second TT bike with hydraulic discs. Actually I want that second one now, but the options out are far too expensive and/or hastily/poorly wrought. If Cervelo had a P2-X frameset that I could get for what I paid Trek for the SC7 ($2,000 even) I'd have one right now. But the Cervelo disc option is about $5k too expensive and the only other contender, the Quintana Roo, is both $2k too expensive and I just don't trust the performance of the bike. I do believe it could be bottom rung aerodynamically. I mean, we all sat around and criticized Cervelo's development of the P5-X but that was actually the most tested bike ever made. That they didn't release that testing is beside the point. QR basically just slapped discs on their rim version. We're splitting hairs here, because it's like half a dozen watts, but that's everything in these discussions.
I still can't wrap my mind around having a TT bike with hydraulic discs as my only TT bike, however. There is just too much that is a pain in the ass about them, especially for race day use. What happens when you get a rear flat on your P5-X? You are basically out of the race. Go home.
And yet I can't wrap my head around having a TT bike with rim brakes as my only TT bike. Because there is the prospect that you could actually die riding a Cervelo P4 with carbon clinchers in the rain. That shit is dangerous. You really want discs in the rain, especially when you're training.
Can you tell I think about this a little bit?
Yes, I can. Sounds a little like me in some aspects. Over-analyzing every aspect. I have had several bikes (Kubota kalibur, p2, spec. transition, and now a speed concept gen2 7.5) The SC was my dream bike when I had the specialized transition, and my awesome wife let me buy it. I wish I hadn't. I love it, but it is heavy and doesn't like turns. It is pretty much a "fast forward" bike. I miss my transition and kinda wish I could stop lusting over the trek and just sell it and go back to the transition, and pocket a few bucks. But, I wont.
Anyway, good luck and I hope you find contentment in your p4 or SC. I'm curious to see what you think of the SC and it's agility once you build it up.
By the way, what is your profession? You remind me mile2424 with the large priced bikes...how do you afford it.