I think that "hidden cables" and "integrated brakes" sortof go hand in hand. It would be challenging to truly hide the cables, especially for the front brake, without integrating the brake. The only way I can think of to do that would be to source a specific center pull brake like the Tektro, then build your frameset with a custom fairing designed to hide the cable for that specific that specific brake. Which, if you think about it, is tantamount to "integrating" that brake anyway.

EDIT:

So, to be clear, my "other" vote would be to combine the brake and cable options into one.

---

---

TriRig.com
The Triathlon Gear Guide

man I hope the forum gets some kind of kick back from all this free marketing and design info that Specialized will be getting from all this ;-)

---

He who understands the WHY, will understand the HOW.

But it is not really any one of these features to me, but that the SC is the only bike that combines all of these.

That being said I really like the Shiv for all the similar reasons (other than the draft box).

The combination of: Integrated brakes, no cables, aero skewers, & well thought out functionality (speedbox, mounts). On their own, each is nice, but the combo is a Home run for TREK with this one. I hope to take one for a spin soon....

I voted for the kammtail.

Other bikes have done integrated brakes, hidden stuff, bayonet forks, etc.

The kammtail was one of the main things about the bike that has the potential to really push things forward. Is it truly faster all around? I dunno, but Trek really did somethign different.


That and I think the KVF on my bike looks bad ass.

On the Black Berry so I couldn't respond to the actual poll.

If I were to, I would choose other and the rationale is that given we know most of the "super bikes" are equally fast, what bike looks the best?

To me, that is the SC. From the shape of the tubes, to the speed box, to the kick ass team graphics, I think Trek gets it in this area!

You can't just be a fast bike, you need to "look" like a fast bike and believe they achieve that the best.

---

-----------------------------------------------------------
"Chrissie wins because she trains really f'ing hard and races really f'ing hard and was blessed with a huge f'ing motor" Jordan Rapp

Agree! Cervelos are looking worse and worse, I hate the Shiv, and never heard of/seen the others. I really like the Trek paint schemes, even on the WSD which I usually do not like. If I were to spend that $$ on a bike, I'd want it to look good. For the vast majority of us, these bikes will be barely faster for us anyway.

Other = ALL of the above. Lots of other bikes have oneof those features, but Trek brought all of them into a single bike.

Agreed

ALSO: Adjustability. from what I can tell, it's one of the more adjustable TT bikes, let alone "super bikes"

Especially since i block the corporate ips of all the other bike companies! So they can't see the results! ;)

---

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

I really think that you should add "Made in USA" to the poll, that above all others is my reason that I want that bike far over others that it compares to - be it the P4 or the Trek (both I figure are equal)...I take the Trek cause it is made here.

---

----------------------------------------------------------

What if the Hokey Pokey is what it is all about?

I like the fact that they have vertical drop outs. Maybe I'm already 'old school'?

Me too.

Agreed.

All of the above. The aero advances and ultra clean lines combined with the Tri specific features make for a formidable package.

I couldn't name one above any others.

---

"the trick is to keep losing weight until your friends and family ask you if you've been sick. then you know you're within 10 pounds. if they start whispering to each other, wondering if you've got cancer or aids, you're within 5. when they actually do an intervention, you're at race weight." - Slowman

it will be interesting to see if the SC shapes the industry in the same way the P3 did ... once the P3 shrouded the rear wheel, then everybody had to do it. or made a point of why they didn't (Look).

this is pretty entertaining because the hidden brakes are the only "first" on the SC. and they aren't that much of a first, as Jamis and Kuota and Giant had done it ... plus the SC doesn't manage to do it with the down-tube any closer. its not as snug as the P4, Plasma2 or new Felt. the draft box is new, but you'll never see it in a UCI race. if they didn't like the P4, they sure won't like this.


the doutrap is this only piece i really covet. does anyone else integrate a sensor like the SC?

That they substantially changed the geometry makes the SC a lot more attractive vs. the TTX for me (at least to dream about).

I think the fact that so many features streamline the bike (hidden cables, integrated brake, duotrap) is more enticing than any one feature. That combo and also little details make it seem like trek really WAS trying for the triathlon market.

For instance, the speedbox and bontrager bento box mounting system is definitely not a revolutionary technology (water bottle mount screws?) but the fact that they're there shows that trek was looking at what people in triathlon were jury rigging through zip-ties and tape, and attempted to remedy that.

Lance Armstrong rides it ...

---

I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser Gate. All those moments will be lost in time like tears in rain.

I had a close look at the SC up close for the first time for a few minutes at The Bike Barn in Penticton over IMC weekend.

Note I am not an engineer nor do I know that much about aerodynamics.

FWIW - The one thing that is apparent to me is how clean the front end of the bike is. By hiding all the cables and a total integration of the aerobars, the head-tube, top-tube and the hidden front brake - it's a very clean looking front end. It looks aero.

The two fixed cases - the hard bento box on the top tube and the draft box are also interesting features - particularly for triathletes as this solves the dilemma of what to do with some of the crap that you need to cart along with you in a triathlon - and have place to store this stuff without making the bike worse off aerodynamically. It would appear that you could get everything you need for a clincher change in the draft box. If riding tubular, you could get a carefully folded 19mm tubular spare in there, but I doubt there would be room for C02 and an adapter - that would have to go elsewhere. The

The frame members themselves, the down and seat tubes in particular, Trek's so called KamTail shape, compared to the NACA shaped Cervelo tubes, do not appear to be that aero - but this is just a visual. Who knows what the numbers are?

Just some quick observations.

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

Hell, Zipp and Hooker were doing that two decades ago...just about two decades anyways...

---

----------------------------------------------------------

What if the Hokey Pokey is what it is all about?

I'm not an engineer, nor a TT bike historian. I have been riding the SC for a month. It's like cheating. I came from a 9.9TTX, and the SC is completely different. It's much more responsive when you start up a hill, and it handles much more like a road bike. It is also a more confident descender. In steady state, it just seems to want to stay at velocity without demanding more power.

---

jdicker@trainingbible.com

I agree with Old & Slow.

The taste of the pudding is in the eating. I've ridden the Ordu, a Ceepo, a P3C and a P2C - which I assume would feel the same as a P4 and a bunch of other bikes. The SC stands out because of its responsiveness. I've had my SC since June and ridden it over 1,000 miles. If there is one thing that stands out on the SC that I have NEVER NOTICED in any other bike I have ridden is its power transfer characteristics. The SC frame, fork, BB combination is unique in that there is very little power lost in pedal strokes. It may be because of the huge BB and the very stiff headtube area.

Second, the overall geometry is highly adjustable and fits quite well at least for me. I like the low base bar and the ability to adjust the arm pad and aero bar - in a manner completely independent from the adjustment of the base bar. That adjustability just made it so much easier to find my aero sweet spot.

Third, the integrated ANT cadence and speed sensor. No more zip ties for me, no more adjustments of magnets, no separated cyclometers and cadence counters. The SC is seamless in this matter.


Looks and all are great features in a bike but like any cake, you can't really say much about it until you taste it. And you guys have to ride an SC, not just for a couple of miles around the block - but a properly fitted SC suited to your dimensions. The miles will just fly by.

p:)

---

.........................__0.............0
...................._.-\ <,_.........</\_
.....~_.o^,....(...)./.(...)......._/\...

Another vote for "all of the above". Also, the SC seems to consider the unique needs of the triathlete as well as the TT athlete.

---

================================
blog
twitter