The FELT TT/Tri bikes and AR road bikes' shapes have always been and remain UCI compliant without any changes. Only the Tk1 frameset was affected by the rule clarification extending the frame 3:1 restriction to the seatpost. Pointing out, for example, that the downtube of "bike XYZ" is narrower than 25mm, or the seat tube is deeper than 80mm and thus not UCI legal was not meant to poke at anyone, only to answer why "bike XYZ" is non-compliant.

I am jealous of the SPECIALIZED "S" logo and their ability to create such a lasting icon, not unlike the Nike "SWOOSH."
I am jealous of Giant's production capacity outside of Asia. What a coup to be able to assemble bikes in the EU from Asian supplied parts and frames and avoid duty.

The Stem/Brake structure on the front of those bikes was innovative and clever. I'm eager to see how the UCI sees it before I decide if I'm jealous.

-SD

---

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

0k, I got it. But does that means than once you set up the seat post you won't be able to modifiy the BB to seat distance (seat height)?

Sergio[/reply]
You can still move the seatpost up and down to a small degree (1cm), and the seatpost head can be moved up and down as well, just as it can on ISP bikes. In the case of buying a used Tk1 that has already been cut, a new seatpost can be purchased to get you back to a full, uncut length capable of fitting anyone with a saddle height between 618 - 898mm cBB-tS

-SD

---

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

You can still move the seatpost up and down to a small degree (1cm), and the seatpost head can be moved up and down as well, just as it can on ISP bikes. In the case of buying a used Tk1 that has already been cut, a new seatpost can be purchased to get you back to a full, uncut length capable of fitting anyone with a saddle height between 618 - 898mm cBB-tS

-SD[/reply]Maybe this is only an interest for those riders still growing, but I figured the range of adaptation once cut was rather small. This is also important because pursuit bikes are shared or more commonly, passed from one rider to the other in a team more than any other type of bike. Maybe I am wrong, but I can imagine the first Tk1s that hit the track were used by more than one rider and an unlimited adjustment seatpost came handy.

The UCI's sway ways are annoying some of us. This debate is like a Keirin race, a bit harsh at times but no real harm intended I am sure. :)

Thanks Dave, I am always looking forward to your posts.

Sergio

---

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: English is not my first language. Please read this translated post considering that.

So what has become of this ban? Is it official, pending, speculation, rumor?

Read Cervelo´s homepage today.
It says that "the verdict is finally in" about the P4 and the only exception is that you can´t use the waterbottle in some roadraces-so....

Have they changed the seatpost or will the old one be legal eventhough not 3:1? No concerns about fitting inside that 8cm infinite rectangle?

Also the so called team edition modell features the ventus handlebar which isn´t within 3:1 -so which team is racing on that modell?


-----What I really want to know is-can I buy a P4 -09 or -10 and it wont be obsolete in 2010 or that I will have to get a new seatpost?

(already sc....wed by the UCI once (zipp 3001))

Before Cervelo updated the website with 2010 models I called them and was told that the after market seat post will be offered for P3 and P4

Would be nice to see something more official on that....
Will the 2010 models have this seatpost as original equipment?

(Patrik- sounds like Swedish spelling to me ?)

The P2 as well, I'm assuming...

---

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

where does it say this? On the P4 page they link to the same UCI document that they link to for all the bikes which is a drawing of an Al P3 and P2. I can guarantee that my P2C's chain and seat stays are different than what is on that drawing.

Under "Introduction"

In fact, its aerodynamically invisible brake, integrated water bottle and dozens and dozens of other aerodynamic details make it so fast, that there were federations contemplating if it was too fast for their races or not. Now the verdict is in, and the P4 is legal for all races. Some road races may request that you use the standard Elite aero bottle instead of the special P4 bottle, but in all other races this very innovative P4 feature is not a problem. And with the Elite bottle, it still performs very, very well.

I´m also concerned that the same year 2000 or so document of the aluminum versions is shown as proof of legality, lots of water has passed under alot of bridges since then...

So with all of the info here on this thread, is there any resource that lists the UCI legal frames and components?

So with all of the info here on this thread, is there any resource that lists the UCI legal frames and components?

Have not read the whole thread over, but perhaps it has to do with the fact that none of this UCI stuff applies to triathlon. Furthermore, even if you do cycling time-trials( something that surprisinly few triathletes do, despite having all the go fast gear), they rarly measure bikes or apply the UCI rules. I will admit that this does vary from place to place. My wife competes in road races and time trials and the only time that her TT bike was ever checked/measured, was at the National Championships.

So really this stuff applies to I am guessing less than 1% of the triathlon population!

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

...on top of that, in the US, one of the few places where UCI-legality was an issue was for Masters TT nats...and I know that there are at least 2 rule change proposals that are to be voted on by USAC this month, one of which exempts the 3:1 ratio constraint, the other (and more practical IMHO) approach exempts Masters Nats from UCI equipment/position rules entirely.

---

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

Tom,

Good news on the US Masters Assoc.

Only on Slowtwitch can a 9-page thread get going on something that essentilly applies to no one! :)

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

Not including of course the guy I'm replying to and the guy he's replying to. ;-)

Styrrell

---

Styrrell

If those bikes are ruled UCI illegal, they: (1) probably won't be produced in their current form and (2) will be delayed significantly due to re-design. Bikes like the Trek Speed Concept, Kestrel, Scott Plasma Ltd could also be affected.

Applies to essentially no one? Au contraire, I reckon essentially anyone in the market for a top-end Tri/TT bike for 2010.

It applies to me as well. Thank you very much.

It applies to me as well.

My apologies. Then you must be in that 1%! :)

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

What's wrong with the current USAC regs that are used everywhere else besides national championships? The best thing about them IMHO is that they specifically allow wheel covers.

---

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

I would argue that this/these rulings apply to anyone looking to buy a next gen bike, regardless of their specific sport. These UCI rulings are going to drive and mold the design of all the cutting edge bikes. I think it is a well established fact that these super bikes are not being designed for triathetes but for professional cycling. Triathletes want the bikes BUT we don't have the market clout to allow Trek/Giant/Specialized/Cervelo to give UCI the finger and bring us the forward thinking bike designs we (triathletes) want. Although the rulings don't matter to triathletes they will be shaping the product market for us.

Although the rulings don't matter to triathletes they will be shaping the product market for us.

No doubt, but why is this a concern to you?

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

I never said it was a concern to me (run of the mill AG'er). I simply say that the UCI rulings do apply to us (in a non direct manner) in that they shape our product market for bikes and bike parts. I guess the level of concern one has as just a triathlete is based on how badly you want to ride a uber bike.

So what are latest info/rumours on the original topic?? Apologies in advance to Fleck for boring him ...

It's still not definite. The latest I heard - from an official source - is that there is still no answer. January 1, 2010 may - or may not - see the bikes being banned.

---

"Non est ad astra mollis e terris via." - Seneca | rappstar.com | FB - Rappstar Racing | IG - @jordanrapp