I’d go back to my origianl point about timing (I bet Gerard is laughing his arse off with all this speculation), if they were going to do an SL, it would have been out a long time ago…
I agree that’s certainly a more valid point. Yeah he’s definitely laughing at us.
My prediction… Dual Carbon, $2200 for the complete bike. Rear end of the soloist carbon, front end of the P2C.
P2sl will move down to the $1500 price point, which it’s close to already.
name one.
Ha, ha! I just suckered our rep into accidently admitting to the existence of a P4. When I called him on it, he laughed but was definitly chagrined to realize he may have let the cat out of the bag. He wouldn’t say anything more about it. Anyone else hear of it?
Strange that nobody would have told me! There is a reason why none of the new bikes on the market are as aero yet as the P3C, it’s simply very hard to do. We are facing the same problem. Of course there are ideas and concepts for a P4C, that’s rather logical if you have a P2C and a P3C, and we started thinking about that the day we finished the P3C. But unfortunately nothing concrete yet.
Hmm…nothing in “concrete”? How about in carbon instead? 
You know, Gerard, with your previous history of denying the existence of the P3C prior to it’s introduction, do you really think anyone’s going to believe you this time? Yeah, right !
Personally, I’d bet that you guys have the next iteration well under development…but, until someone comes out and matches or betters the P2C or P3C, what incentive do you have to bring it out? Just keep it in your “hip pocket” and wait for the time that another frame builder matches your bikes, and then “trump” it the very next day. Sounds like a fun business model to me 
(I remember watching HP do this in the “workstation wars” ~10 years ago. A company like SGI would come out with a workstation that was faster than HP’s top of the line…and within the week HP would announce a new model that leapfrogged that competitor. You KNEW they could’ve come out with it sooner, but they obviously waited until it was “necessary”. Makes it pretty hard for the competition to catch up.)
No new bikes, but better paint jobs. And, maybe an option or two when it comes to paint: the Euro team paint and something else.
Oh you’re a funny guy… however i got the p3c frameset for 1900. I got one heck of a steal on it.
Grant
Yeah, but wasn’t that the second one you bought
.
yeah but i sold the other one for a pretty good price so it all evens out
You know if you keep giving me crap i will turn it into a training bike and you’ll never get it haha.
Grant
You didn’t answer SuperDave’s question about which UCI legal frames are faster than the Kestrel Airfoil.
Since Dave has the tunnel data from the development of the Felt DA/B2, I am going to call him the expert, and you the armchair QB, slick.
Chris
Thanks, slick, i missed that one. I don’t have any hard data you’re right. So i can’t answer that its just an assumtion with all the bikes out there that there would be a good shot to have at least one faster then it.
Grant
Have you tried dimples to create a P3CD?
Maybe a P3-OCD ?
Considering Kestrel states that the airfoil is 1:10 seconds faster per 40k than their Talon. I would be surprised if a lot of bikes, including the Felt and Cervelo carbon models, aren’t faster than an airfoil. Just a hunch though.
My hunch relies upon the fact that the Kestrel sports portly tubes and an ill fitting seat tube cut out. It would seem that many frames would do better in the wind tunnel by a minute or more.
Just because there are 1000 different UCI legal bike frames being produced doesn’t mean that one of them has to be faster than another frame that doesn’t have to follow the same rules.
Granted, Kestrel could still use some work on the width of the downtube, but I guess they figure that faster is good enough for now.
Chris
Felt says otherwise, and they tested damned near every frame available.
Not to mention that they are a competing company and would be VERY happy to be able to tout that their UCI frame was faster than even the Airfoil.
Chris
Is Felt’s data available somewhere?
Did Felt say otherwise, or did one of their representatives leave an open ended question to hint at the fact that we may or may not know for sure without data?
If Superdave laid down the data and I missed it, show it to me. Otherwise, you’re doing the same as me, speculating.
He said the DA was faster than the P3C but not faster than the Airfoil or Hooker. He may also have mentioned the Lotus, but I don’t recall that specifically.
No official data was published, just a ‘this was faster than that, and that was faster than something else’.
Chris
Not to nitpick but in my searching Dave admits that the Lotus was the fastest hands down, and I remember him saying that the Zipp frame was also very fast. He never mentions the specific performance of the Kestrel airfoil, he groups together non-uci bikes as a whole and makes statements about them. Maybe you again read into his words too much?
I, like you, am only trying to get on the fastest bike possible. If you have a quote from Dave to this nature I’d love to see it. However, at this point my position remains.
I’d keep searching…Dave has posted on several different threads with little tidbits of information.
I could be wrong, but I am almost positive that he has specifically stated that the airfoil was among the bikes that were not surpassed.
Chris