Blueman,

Since you attended the wind tunnel test, you ought to be an expert on the Kirsten wind tunnel and its staff. That is the same tunnel, and staff that conducted testing for Lance Armstrong and the F1 research team this past winter. Oh yeah, and the rider who you claim knows about triathlon is the founder of the Husky Triathlon club at UW. I am not claiming that the test was rigged for commercial purposes - quite the contrary. However, you should get your facts straight before reporting this 'first-hand account' on the testing procedure and the UW students and staff.

- "the test was conducted by the University of Washington Aeronautical Laboratory staff and students. What do they know about the "triathlon industry"? Uh, NOTHING. They are students and staff that don't know Trek from Huffy..... Biased? Doubt it."

---

______________________________________________________
Are you being hearing the sound of thunder?

Sorry. Can't start lowering the standards. We will wind up with a bunch of Zealanders and other goat-lovers :)

hey Monk, kiwis are cool! :-)
(and they don't have goats but sheeps)

So when will this new Softride be available? and when wiil the Sofride website be updated with this new rig and alll the detailed info? Adam or someone at Softride?

How is this new softride different from my TT7?

By the way I love my bike. I have gone thru one beam after 3k miles but softride sent me a new one for free and it is like new again. I had a 700c powerwing first which was soft in the bottom bracket and a little heavy but the TT7 feels as stiff as my Look KX light and I can't tell which one climbs better.

---

Ken St. Pe'

Gotta warn you, Monk, that in these parts debating the merits of goats vs sheep is like talking about powercranks on slowtwitch...a very dangerous pastime.

BAHHHHH.....

---

kiwipat

per ardua ad astra

Well just be sure you keep the pretty ones for yourself!

Well that explains your jealousy!

Fear not, if you are ever down in these parts I will make sure you get the pick of the herd.

---

kiwipat

per ardua ad astra

Slingshot. Now THERE was a cool bike. Are they still being made? With a P3 seat tube they would be quite aero and even cooler

I once saw an ad for one that broke apart with a cool clamp, for shipping in a tiny box. Never saw or rode one however. I almost bought a used Slingshot, but got a QR SE from Dan instead. Thanks Slowman, that bike was great before it died in a crash.

---

TriDork

"Happiness is a myth. All you can hope for is to get laid once in a while, drunk once in a while and to eat chocolate every day"

Why don't we just share yours?

So i find this in my junk mail folder today:

"Hey Ben
Give me a call because I am calling you out on this one. If you really believe what you say to be true, call me, I would love to discuss this with you instead of you hiding on Slowtwitch making comments to things that you no nothing about. The hotmail account is a great way to remain anonymous on forums. Look forward to you call.

Chig Martin
Softride Bike|Sales and Marketing Manager
chig@softride.com | cell: 423.314.7992
888.258.7303| 360.647.7420 | f: 360.647.1884 "

First and foremost, chig, I have 3 email addresses. One is my student email, which you will not get and I do not post on the internet. The other is a different hotmail account that I use to sign up for free shit with and so do not check unless I am expecting something useful, like a free ipod offer, to be there. My name is also listed with my hotmail account, so I am not really anonymous. You can also pm as many do and find out all you could ever want to know about me and more. Additionally, many of the people who post here know me and know not to take me too seriously.

Well, chig, the test, and particularly the manner in which the results are presented, really does come across as bullshit. The P3 in the picture has about a half foot of round spacers. The softride has very few if any, it’s hard to tell from the crappy “press release” (as if this being a press release adds any validity to it’s content whatsoever) pictures. If anything the “test” tells us far more about the importance of fit than it does about frame aerodynamics.

· “Bikes were appropriate size for test rider 55cm, 700c wheel”

Apparently not, as that is the worst fitted p3 I have ever seen, I would worry about shearing the steering tube off if I braked too hard.

The “test” fitting was obviously based on what would be favorable to softride. Why not get the rider in an ideal position on the p3, and then mimic that position on the softride? This is even more important considering that even slight changes in pedaling style and knee positioning have measurable effects in the tunnel.

Why aren’t the pictures of the p3 and the trek bigger? Why aren’t there any big pictures that show the rider positions on the p3, the trek and the blade? Why does it seem like you are trying to hide something?

The chart that illustrates the “results” is an “Ave. drag listed above was calculated from the data collected at the following yaw angles 0, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 degrees.”

Why did you have to use an average? (this make the whole “press release” look even more bogus), Give us the data from each yaw angle.

Why limit the test to just those yaw angles? How can you make a general claim about a bike being x amount faster in a race if you used averages from 6 selected yaw angles

How do you respond to other bike companies claims, particularly Gerard and cervelo, who has made it clear that he thinks a p3 is just as aero, perhaps slightly less aero, as a softride?

It would also be interesting if you transfered the same fit and components over to a 1 inch lugged steal frame.

I have no problem believing that a softride might be the fastest bike you can get if you prefer to ride a bike like you sit on a sofa, or even the fastest frame period. Based on the “press release” however, I can’t find the grounds for softride to make sweeping claims that there frame is the most aerodynamic frame on the market with no catch, particularly by the margins that the "press release" is claiming.

Without buying into the "slings and arrows" going on here, I would second Ben's invitation to Softride to publish the full set-up data and drag data, and not just "results" which appears to have been selected solely for purposes of the marketing folks. Oh yeah, I ride a Softride, so I have no motivation to find fault in the protocols. But give me a look at them....and I can make up my own mind.

---

kiwipat

per ardua ad astra

Thanks for posting that for me Ben

Being a posting rookie,(but always out there in the shadows) I thought that it was lost. I was relieved to see my reply to you show up today.You college guys are smart about things like computers and such.I wish I could go back to those days of youth and supperior intelligence again.

As I said ,if you want all the answers call me on my cell @ 423-314-7992,any time. Im one of the funniest guys in the biz and lots of fun to talk to. That goes for any body that wants to ever ask me a question on Softride, life, women, places you shouldnt ride yor bike in a speedo or what really goes on up in them hills on cold nights with slowman. PT has filled me in on the last subject.

Thanks

Chig

Only .005% of the population will ever do a triathlon, let alone an IM

I actually really liked that Slingshot. They are still making them in Michigan, only ones I have seen recently were single speed mountain bikes. It was hard initially to get used to the lateral flex of the spring, but once you did I never have ridden a bike that turned better through bumpy corners.

I think people are arguing here over insufficient data, I would like to see the complete test. The handlebar position and seat position as well as all the other variables including aerobar type should be the same for all bikes. The main weakness is that it was only one rider. Even assuming that the other variables were kept the same, then you can still only confidently draw the conclusion that this was only effective for this rider in this position. I would like to see say 5 riders tested in different positions.

Having said that I would believe that the Softride (with a disc) is potentially more aero than the conventional frames. But come 2006 it wont matter as the USCF is adopting UCI bike rules so I couldnt use it anyway.

So, Chig when are they going to have the new Softride FasTT7 on the website to look at?

That photo of the P3 is a wide-angle photo from up close, so anything in the front looks much bigger and higher than the rear. You will a notice a similar but opposite effect in the bottom right picture, which is from the rear, but not as close.

PS While I own and love my TT7, I have no affiliation with SR.

---

_________________
Dick

Take everything I say with a grain of salt. I know nothing.

That may be, but ignoring the rear end of the p3, the distance from the head tube to the bars is very long. The blade has a long headtube, so it will have fewer spacers.

Either way, i am still waiting for softrides response. I am not going to waste my cell minutes to talk to chig, although i'm sure he is a great guy. Until someone from softride gives reasonable and logical explanations to my questions/points, i will assume that this is just a marketing gimmick to get people to call them.

Ben,

In response to your question about the validity of the aformentioned press release. I would just like to state that there are reputable experts willing to back up the fact that Softrides are the fastest most areodynamic bikes ever tested at WU's low speed wind tunnel. If you have any more questions, please feel free to post. In fact we will be posting their cell phone numbers shortly.

Dan Rather ;)

---

Las Vegas NV | IM KY 07

My point is that the height of the spacers will appear different from that angle.

Also, you would have to see the saddle to aerobar height differential on all of the bikes. Obviously different riders with different positions would necesitate different number of spacers to equalize these numbers.

---

_________________
Dick

Take everything I say with a grain of salt. I know nothing.

His seatpost is pretty tall. He may have long legs.

---

_________________
Dick

Take everything I say with a grain of salt. I know nothing.

Well,

very often I disagree with Ben (specially his views of France :-)) but on this one he is quite right.
I am not doubting the results of Softride. Heck if these types of bikes are banned by the UCI, there is a reason.
Pretty much anything which looks innovative ends up being banned by the UCI (still surprised that they haven't say anything about the P3 not being a double diamond because of the curved tube).
So, I am fairly sure it's more aero than most bikes (maybe the lotus is more aero). But then, posting the results on your site would clarify things for good.

As for things going on in the mountains of Slowman, I tell you: nothing! Slowman is in bed at 9pm! in fact he was in bed so early, I thought once I was back in where pretty much all the tri dudes go to bed really early.

sheesh , slings n'arrows is right. But i must add that i saw some of the photos from the tunnel while they were still warm in the camera, and there was LIKE an inch of space btw. the rear tire and the curve of the frame. In a true test you shouldn't even see light btw. the tire/ frame interface.

---

i think there, 4 am

All the data will be posted on our web site very soon. At the same time it will be published in Triahtlete magazine. This is the reason we are being a bit tight on the data. We do not want to take away from their article.

This test was designed by myself & the University of Washington testing personnel. The actual data acquisition tests were performed by them. I was involved with the flow visualizations testing i.e. smoke & tufts.

The cyclist was positioned the same on each bike. Positioning was checked using a goneometer to measure hip angle and knee angle and a tape measure to measure vertical distance from rider’s earlobe to the upper surface of the bike mount. Seat tube angle was also verified with digital inclinometer, measuring from BB center to Greater Trochanter. Aerobar angle was adjusted using a digital inclinometer. The test rider focused on a fixed point projected into the test section, keeping head position consistent. Stem length, spacer height, and saddle positions were determined beforehand based on the rider’s existing personal bike fit. Bike geometry was checked once the bike was installed to ensure consistency between runs. The test rider was pedaling at an average of 85 rpm. Power output averaged 225W. Approximately 4 hours of on wind time.

All components on each bike frame were identical. The following table lists the component spec for each bike frame:

Zipp 909 wheelset

HED Aerobar with Dura ace barend shifter

Profile BSC fork

FSA carbon crankset

Dura-Ace group

Look pedals

The windspeed which the testing was conducted at was 30 Mph. Both Drag and Cd were plotted along rider axis. The data from the Cd was applied to Jim Martin’s "Validation of a mathematical model for road-cycling power" A ground velocity was calculated for each and applied over 40K

Bike

Mph

M/s

Time (sec.)

Diff (sec)

FasTT7

20.60267655

9.210223348

4343

0

P3

20.22088683

9.039548023

4425

82

Blade

20.16619884

9.015100293

4437

94

Team TT

20.0802119

8.976660682

4456

113

I think Francois in Montreal said it best.


"Have someone independent (who will not be doing the tests) design the testing protocol. By independant, I mean someone in academia that understands exercise physiology, and, ideally, someone skeptical about your product. Have another independant person review the protocol and suggest improvements. Have someone (with similar credential) perform the testing. Make it part of the contract that there will be no interaction between you and the person responsible for the testing during the entire duration of the study. ALL results will be made available to the public, in the same form and at the same time it will be made available to you. No restriction for scientific publication. It should also be specified in the contract that any publicity mentioning the study should also includes a link to the web site containing ALL results. "

It would be great if some independent 3rd party would take on some comparative testing. Not just aerodynamics, but all the variables which effect performance.

We here at Softride Inc. Challenge the all other manufactures: Cervelo, Lightspeed, Trek, or any other manufacture to go back to the University of Washington tunnel for another test. I propose we have an unbiased 3rd party create the test procedures. All the manufactures interested need to provide a frame, and their share of test cost. A representative from each company to witness the test.

Any one interested?

---

Brady O'Hare
Softride Inc.
brady.ohare@softride.com