kileyay wrote:
..., Dan has made the statement that Cervelo released the P5-X with the largest amount of data ever. That may be true for industry insiders -- we know they did a lot of testing, and I have spoken with at least three folks from three different firms who have seen the data. Dan has seen this data, of course. But it's just not true for customers -- you have not seen it. I have not seen it. That's okay, though! Maybe they have their reasons for this and chief among them might be because explaining this stuff to consumers is very hard. These tests are complex; they have sources of error; and all protocols will come under scrutiny by a keen eye. That's a business decision for Cervelo, but I don't think the way Cervelo has released this bike and explained its aerodynamic benefit to consumers has been 'transparent' compared to
the way I will explain this testing, release raw data, and interact with/answer questions about the testing. If Dan and I still disagree on this point, which it seems we do, fine. I'm not going to get all snarky about it anymore because that's just not productive either. I have a White Paper to write and there's no use continuing to talk past each other or get heated and let this thing devolve into a super stan ban slam.
I think you should release all data
now, just de-indentify the bikes.
It can't hurt to have several minds looking into this, no?
Best case, you'll get the analysis protocol peer-agreed
before you release the 'white paper' ... (hate that expression, write a report dammit).