http://bikesportmichigan.com/reviews/blade.shtml


this review on tom's sight lays out many of the complaints about the bike. Having said that, Lance armstrong used to ride this bike in TT's before the trek TT bike came out

I have a question regarding Tom’s Blade bike review. In the review he states:



Dan Empfield stated in a bike review for a new QR bike that the top tube was tilted the “wrong way.” The year after, QR

tilted back the top tube to a “normal” position. Dan liked that as he stated so in a later review.



Any comments on how to tilt the tube the best way or is it just a personal preference?



Mike

A couple things about shaped top tubes.

1) Why do it? I don't understand the need for a bladed top tube at all, regardless of orientation.

2) Many bikes (including some QRs) have ovalized top tubes where the major diameter is oriented horizontally so that the tube is essentially wider. I don't know what the supposed benefit of this is, but a common complaint is that the wider tube causes people to bang into it with their knees more often.

I need to set the record straight about my Blade review. I took unmitigated hell for it, but I have not removed it. It represents one man's opinion- mine. The bike is a stiff riding, time trail specialty bike optimized for minimal frame flex and possibly also some improved aerodynamics as well as visual impact- a bigger factor in people's buying decisions than most care to admit. There were technical problems (IMHO) with the frame, I detailed them in my review. Some of those problems have actually been corrected by Litespeed, especially the cable routing. Don't even think for one second I am waffling or doing a 180- I am not. The review of that model year bike stands. Frankly, I didn't like it- it wasn't for me. But it IS for someone out there: Huge, heavy, beefy powerful riders who want a cool looking bike in titanium. The new Blade has some improvements. I ordered one as a demo to test again. You have to decide for yourself if the bike fits you and is appropriate for your riding style and goals.

---

Tom Demerly
The Tri Shop.com

Last year i decided to get a TT bike and the Blade was one that I wanted to check out. When I saw the thing I said why did they put that stupid top tube on the thing, it makes no sense. The shop owner shrugged and simply said some people think it looks cool. I'm a professional engineer. I engineer buildings and have never done an analysis of a bicycle but to my eye having the top tube with the major axis horizontal makes sense but vertical does not. So, Tom, when I read your review, I thought right on. That's what I thought. If you hurt Lightspeed's feelings with your review, I think they should get over it and fix what used to be a nice bike.

paul

As Tom D said, his review is one man's opinion. I happen to have owned the Blade for two years and LOVE this bike. I've logged 1 ironman and countless halfs and plenty of training rides and the bike still feels great. It's stiff, fast, smooth and a delight to ride. I'm looking forward to many more happy years on my Blade.

Happy Training Everyone!

Most bike companies are looking at how a bike cuts throught the wind. Litespeed designed the bike to catch the wind, then use the wind to propel you forward. So, technically, in a wind tunnell, a round top tube makes sense. But most of the time in a race, the wind is coming at different angles. The blade catches the wind to generate forward propulsion in the same way an airplane wing uses the wind to generate lift. Hopefully this helps.

I own a QR and at first I was also curious about the goofy top tube. The one thing I have really noticed with it is that is does not catch crosswind! Adressing the benifits, I do remember seeing somewhere that it helps with stiffness in some aspect and complience with another, but I can't remember where. (Maybe the QR web site.) As for the knee banging issue, no problem. Just make sure you peddle up and down like you are supposed to do, not side to side.
The goofy Gopha

---

I don't work here, I just live here

This argument is laughable. The "push" idea behind a crosswind and large cross section simply is one sided. Lenticular discs and large surface areas make great sails, that is true, but you can't have lift without drag. Period. Drag is slower than no drag. If you think a 30 mph cross wind is going to "propel" you down the road because your top tube is bladed to "catch" the wind and translate it into forward motion, what is happening with that force from the other direction?

Cervelo has the right top tube idea aerodynamically speaking, functionally a small cross section top tube is seldom adequate for front end rigidity; keeping the front and rear wheels in the same plane is a big tube's job.

Check out the TiPhoon from Litespeed/QR, it's basically a ti P2K. It gets my nod over the Blade.

---

https://www.kickstarter.com/...bike-for-the-new-era