Has anyone tried out the new Blade, and if so can you comment on how it compares to the 2003/2004 QR Typhoon? It looks like the same bike with a little sleeker top tube and higher seat tube which I like but do not know how this will affect the ride. The Blade also has the new Lightspeed fork which I doubt is as good as the Reynolds fork that comes with the Typhoon. I know the Typhoon is a great ride and much lighter and aero then the old blade, I was just wondering how it stacked up against the new blade.
Not sure about the 2004 versions of these bikes, but for 2003 the Typhoon had better triathlon geometry and a lower MSRP. These factors made the Typhoon a better choice IMO.
I have seen but not tried the new 2004 Blade. It is, IMO, the final version of what had a somewhat dubious beginning. The current 2004 version is highly refined and very different from previous years. The bike appears to make a lot of sense now. It is an expensive bike, but it may be worth it. Another one worth a look is the new Guru Aero-Ti. These bikes share a similar pedigree as far as materials and design are concerned.
I am looking forward to workinmg with the new Blade. I already acknowledge it is a huge improvement over the previous model year Blades. Good job Litespeed, at least it looks that way.
They are both owned by the same company, so there is probably not much difference. The intent is for the tri stuff to be labeled QR and the road bikes to be labeled Lightspeed.
Thanks for the response. I am of the same opinion. If you or anyone else does run this bike through its paces then I hope you would post your review on this website or your own. I have a 2003 Typhoon and if I were to have made any changes (other then the decals) it would have been extending the seat tube and maybe tapering the top tube as the Blade is. I don’t know if this will affect the stiffness of the bike, but the blade looks nice and is a little longer in the top tube which helps us short but long torso guys.