The millions of people who think it is impossible to drink from a front mounted bottle for reasons which I cannot understand, people doing 40k TTs and shorter who don't need a bottle at all, people who prefer to use the downtube for their bottle.


I agree, would be an option for some though, maybe


you underestimate the power of zip ties!


Zip ties can solve all trivialities!

---

---

Kat Hunter reports on the San Dimas Stage Race from inside the GC winning team
Aeroweenie.com -Compendium of Aero Data and Knowledge
Freelance sports & outdoors writer Kathryn Hunter

eki1 wrote:
I must admit for all my negativity towards Cervelo (which is warranted)[/quote]you can keep posting stupid shit all day, but if the bike proves to have less drag, nobody is going to care =)
___________________

classic and 100% true for the test market that is ST!!!

I am curious what that airfoil box on back of the SC does to drag? Anyway, seems to be a lot of questions about where to put shit on the bike and reference to after market bento boxes etc....

Um, when training all that shit goes in my cycling jersey. When racing, that 1 power bar goes in my tri jersey and my few gels are taped the aerobar extension and therefore under my arm and by half way I am using the aid stations. Why the F**K do people care about where to add bento box?

---

@rhyspencer

I think only people that need a new bike and find it appealing will be in the market for the P5, well that, and those that can afford it. I like others that have a bike that is already as fast as the P5, namely the Speed Concept 9, will find fault with the bike, but really it is a great looking bike overall. The front end looks pretty cluncky compaired to the SC, but still not bad. Yes, you will have to find ways to hang spare stuff off the bike, but most do it anyway. Brakes are brakes when you get to this level so that does not even matter. And weight, lets see some numbers. My SC comes in at 16.7 pounds race ready with a Zipp disc and 808 in front. The P5 was designed for the triathlete, but where is the storage equipment integrated and the additional bottle cage on the frame, anyone can put a bottle on the aerobars so this is not really a selling feature.

Oh, and the UCI version from brake looks like an after thought hanging off the fork the way it does.

I like the bike, it just has come inconsistant stuff going on that take the wow factor away when you lok at the fine details, but to each their own. It is a lot nicer then the P4 for sure.

Huh? Based on the fact that the frame is the same between both versions, I'm betting the UCI version was actually the "baseline" design...they then basically said "OK...for non-UCI, how would we change the fork and bars to make it even faster?"...and then reconciled any "cross-compatibility" issues between the 2 versions.

The fact that with a simple fork change one can switch between UCI-legal and UCI-illegal configurations says to me that neither was a "hack job"...

---

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

[quote yme I like others that have a bike that is already as fast as the P5[/quote]
How did you get the two into a wind tunnel already?

The best clue we have, if we take the Trek white paper on the speed concept vs p4, and assumed the ~75 gram reduction from the p4 is real, that would make the p5 much faster than the speed concept.

discuss.

---

---

Kat Hunter reports on the San Dimas Stage Race from inside the GC winning team
Aeroweenie.com -Compendium of Aero Data and Knowledge
Freelance sports & outdoors writer Kathryn Hunter

Sheesh...you and eki1 crack me up with this stuff...

---

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

Not sure its a simple fork change. Would have to take out the brakes from the tri version (unwiring the front brake also assumed) and then install the brakes on the new fork. For the non-mechanics out there its going to be more effort than they want do deal with.

---

Train to race. Race to win.

The uci legal bike comes with the magura brakes as well.

and the fancy aerobar is uci legal, though it doesn't come standard o the uci legal bike.

---

---

Kat Hunter reports on the San Dimas Stage Race from inside the GC winning team
Aeroweenie.com -Compendium of Aero Data and Knowledge
Freelance sports & outdoors writer Kathryn Hunter

It really depends on the shape of the curve. If it were a straight 75 gram drop across all yaw evenly, then looking at the Trek white paper you would expect the P5 to be faster up to about 8 degrees.

If you use the Cervelo data and assume a 75 gram drop across all yaw, then you get at almost all yaw except between maybe between 10 and 15 where the SC would even have a fighting chance. But it would be so greatly crushed at 0-10 who would care.

However, I'd be surprised to see massive 0 yaw improvement. It doesn't look like they shrank front area at all.

Thats fully understood but I was pointing out that Tom A. was alluding to that if you bought the triversion of the bike and wanted to race at a UCI event you could just simply buy the UCI fork and you're good to go but that isn't the full story. From the designs I've seen (the xray photo is the best) you would have to yank out the front brake wires along with removing the brake of course and then reinstalling the wire prior to installing the brake. Not so simple as just throwing on a different fork. Not something that a person with a lot of mechanical know how may want to do. Sure its cheaper than buying a new bike but how much does the UCI fork cost if bought separately?

---

Train to race. Race to win.

Designed within UCI restrictions but not approved by the UCI. That was straight from Damon in one of these threads.

---

"One Line Robert"

You can't compare the SC9 against the P4 from Trek's data because the bars were different, only the SC7 is a valid comparison as it had the same bars.

Cervelo's data is a fair comparison - the SC9 vs P4 with Ventus. Tour magazine performed the same test, too, but they only tested at yaw on the driveside not the non-driveside. Their yaw-weighted average drag had the P4 with Ventus 1W faster than the SC9.

But, you're completely missing the point I was making. After doing the swap, what has been changed? The fork.

THAT points to the UCI-legal version NOT being a "hack job" or afterthought, as was being stated above.

---

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

well MAYBE, that depends on if the SC9 aerobars are as good as the ventus.

---

---

Kat Hunter reports on the San Dimas Stage Race from inside the GC winning team
Aeroweenie.com -Compendium of Aero Data and Knowledge
Freelance sports & outdoors writer Kathryn Hunter

I think the bike is amazing, and have zero problems with cervelo as a brand. I find it a bit of a let down to be served up yet another 10 grand bike. I plan to get excited about new bikes that have the integration, and run half that cost. I do understand that a ton of research goes into these super bikes and the company needs to recoup it's investment. Still...... This isn't anything that earth shattering. It would have been had they Brought the product to market for substantially less.

No, you just remove the cover, unbolt the caliper, swap forks, bolt the caliper back on.

that is all it would take.

---

---

Kat Hunter reports on the San Dimas Stage Race from inside the GC winning team
Aeroweenie.com -Compendium of Aero Data and Knowledge
Freelance sports & outdoors writer Kathryn Hunter

just get the $6,500 frameset
a cheap FSA BB Right Crankset, brakes and areobars are already there, so it would be a cheap 105 build.

---

---

Kat Hunter reports on the San Dimas Stage Race from inside the GC winning team
Aeroweenie.com -Compendium of Aero Data and Knowledge
Freelance sports & outdoors writer Kathryn Hunter

I was just adding a consideration to Jackmotts comments regarding the 75 gram drop. We don't know where it improved or how the drag across yaw changed.

Also, where is this Tour data?

Finally, I think the Trek data probably suited Trek and Cervelo data suited Cervelo. Neither to a terrible degree but somewhat.

Jack, to further clarify what I meant with my previous question:



There's no way that 5.5cm of steerer fits inside that stem. It's also not clear that you can put spacers above the stem, and I haven't seen any pictures with spacers below the stem to know what they look like. So what I'm thinking is that most of the range in the pad stack/reach chart is a one-time deal - you pick your position, cut the steerer, and then you're pretty much stuck with it, though you could move lower by cutting the steerer more. There might perhaps be scope to move by a cm or two, but I don't know how exactly the headset preload and stem attachment works inside there. Obviously you could switch between the Low and High V later, but that is more of a quantum leap, it's not useful for position optimisation where you need to be moving no more than a cm at a time. So I'm hoping Damon can clarify how much movement is possible without changing the steerer length, which I think is going to be different to the position range you can achieve as a one-time deal by cutting the steerer.

cables disappeared
a lot of brake disappeared

---

---

Kat Hunter reports on the San Dimas Stage Race from inside the GC winning team
Aeroweenie.com -Compendium of Aero Data and Knowledge
Freelance sports & outdoors writer Kathryn Hunter

  

Quote:

Plus each has the option to raise the bar+stem on aero-matched 5mm and 10mm fork spacers up to 55mm.

Do you have pics or explanation of the the "fork spacers?" Do they fit under the stem like headset spacers?

So they are not aerobar pad spacers like on the Shiv, et al?

---

Suffer Well.

You need an iPad to be able to buy it:
http://tour-qtr.com/

ahh I see, yeah it looks like in the high V case at least, adjustment after the fact on the fork would be limited. I think with the Lo setups you could leave the top cover off perhaps and have some steerer stick out (speculation)

the pads probably have the ability to adjust up and down though.

---

---

Kat Hunter reports on the San Dimas Stage Race from inside the GC winning team
Aeroweenie.com -Compendium of Aero Data and Knowledge
Freelance sports & outdoors writer Kathryn Hunter

And what about maximum inseam length (bottom bracket to saddle) for the different bike sizes? I assume there is a max value for 75 and for 79 seattube angle.

I cannot find these critical info anywhere.

Nice bike though!

You really have to derive that for yourself, since it would depend on seat model, crank arm length, and seat position.

But since it doesn't use an integrate seat mast the adjust ability is basically infinite. I've never heard of anyone running into inseam limitations.

---

---

Kat Hunter reports on the San Dimas Stage Race from inside the GC winning team
Aeroweenie.com -Compendium of Aero Data and Knowledge
Freelance sports & outdoors writer Kathryn Hunter