In another thread I read that the seatpost of the P2, P3 and P4 are UCI illegal and don’t meet the NEW 3:1 rule?
Does somebody know more about it? Since 3 days I am the owner of a P2 and I want to ride timetrials in which I need an UCI legal bike.
I am the owner of a P2 and I want to ride timetrials in which I need an UCI legal bike.
What level of TT’s are you planning on racing? The reason I ask is that it’s been our experience that it is only at the highest levels that they get concerned about this.
My wife road races at the Sen 1/2 level and the only time that her TT bike has been checked is at the Provincial and National Championship TT’s. At all other TT’s that she has raced, they have never measured the bike - even at one of the bigger stage races for women in the U.S.
From what I have seen from the past is that I have 3 time trials in which they check the bikes.
And I don’t want to get disqualified because I use an UCI illegal bike. And in the hours before the important time trials I want to think about one thing: “going fast” and not about my bike and the UCI rulez…
While its true that bikes are often not checked at events, IF it is a UCI event and you get protested afterward by another rider, you are toast.
Ok, I found out that the Cervelo’s are UCI illegal in the near future.
The new UCI rules are delayed but will probably be inplemended in 2010. For 2009 no problems with Cervelo but do I want a bike for only one year?
I own a P3C and I´m a bit concerned as well. I plan on racing Swedish timetrial nationals this summer and I have no idea if my bike will be legal 3 months before the race.
Does anybody have more information about what is going on with the “new and improved” rules? I also just read Specialized´s homepage where they boast about their seatpost being of 4:1 ratio.
Yes I no doubt think the UCI sucks. I´m still pissed after they illegalized my Zipp 3001…
I dont really understand the rules but if its just a seatpost, can it be as simple as chaning your seat post and your bike will be illegal?
Or is this something that is going to cause the entire bike to be changed for when the rule is in play (2010ish)?
Not so easy on a cervelo P2,3,4 … But shure you could probably adapt/ modify it in some way…
Ok scenario:
I realize the local Y tri races probaly arent affected by this type of rules etc., but just for the sake of riding a legal UCI bike, should I hold off on getting a cervelo until they change or if I get a cervelo this year, I will be fine?
Ok, I found out that the Cervelo’s are UCI illegal in the near future.
You know this for a fact? If so, please point me to the particular source.
The new UCI rules are delayed but will probably be inplemended in 2010. For 2009 no problems with Cervelo but do I want a bike for only one year?
Right…and who wants to bet that, when it’s all said and done, the current configurations of the P2 and P3 will be deemed “OK”? Just a hunch… 
you’re right of course, but here’s the problem: are you going to pre-register, buy a hotel, spend a few hours driving–on the hopes that your bike won’t be checked? I don’t think so…
I’ve seen all sorts of crazy stuff WRT officials and applications of the rules. At the SAME race I saw one rider with a disc cover–while another rider lost the overall GC win because her bars were ‘angled down too much’–despite the fact that she rode the same bike in the prologue 2 days earlier??
My solution for this is pretty simple: I just won’t do any UCI races w/TT’s. In these troubling economic times I’ll just send a message by voting with my pocketbook–and I suspect a lot of other riders will as well.
At the pro level, this is a pretty big deal–equipment sponsors are tough enough to get, and bike company budgets (and team budgets) are tight enough right now. Placing additional restrictions which make obsolete existing equipment is mind boggling to me. For amateur hacks like me who do the occasional UCI-regulated race, I’ll just keep my registration fees and travel dollars in my own pocket. I’m not going to go buying a new bike (or fork, or handlebar), since how do I know the rules’ interpretation won’t change yet again? No thanks.
Maybe if enough people do this, USAC will get the message and establish their own, sensible rules.
i don’t have the source, but if cervelo seat posts don’t meet the 3:1 aspect ratio that is now being interpreted by the UCI to dictate seat post dimensions, wouldn’t that make the cervelo p2, p3, p4 illegal in UCI events (as of Jan 1) ?
It would, but as I understand it the situation is. The rules have always explicitely stated 3:1. The UCI has never applied their own rule. At the T of C they said they are looking into applying the rule in the future.
So everything hinges on when or if the UCI applies the rule. So far they haven’t. Keep in mind that bike companies foot the bill for a lot of the cost of UCI racing. I suspect that the UCI doesn’t want to bite the hand that feeds them.
Styrrell
Well, I’ve been on the phone with Cervelo this morning. They sound pretty concerned about this and stated that, with the Test Team out there, Cervelo is committed to getting things squared away with the UCI. The impression I got from the dialog was that it was equal parts fighting the UCI and working on solutions in the event the fighting doesn’t pay off. They said the amount of pressure from manufacturers on the UCI right now is pretty much unprecedented … but they agreed with me when I responded with, “what difference has that ever made?”
There’s no issue with the frames. It’s the seatpost. They told me that, if a change has to be made, they are committed to having changed product available for their customers to purchase as quickly as possible. I indicated that I’m considering racing Masters Nationals. They said to give it a little time, but to call them as the race approaches and “they’ll do all they can to help me ride on a UCI-legal Cervelo.” I’m not entirely sure what that means, but I’m sure they aren’t sure yet, either.
I asked them if it wasn’t true that they took the P3 frameset to the UCI and got their blessings … and if that was the case, how could that blessing now be withdrawn? They said that was, indeed, true. They referred me to the UCI approval letter that’s available by clicking on the UCI Approval link on the P3 page of their website. After the call ended, I clicked on that link and looked at the letter. That letter is from back in 2000 and deals with the old aluminum P3 which has a substantially different seatpost than what the carbon models now have. There’s no UCI approval letter blessing the current seatpost, nor is there anything like it that I could find on their site for the new P4.
So … it sounds like all bets are off. I’d like to think the manufacturers really hate all this and are really committed to fighting it. But it assures at least some market for UCI-revised product and some new sales. Who gets screwed? I’m tryin’ not to drop the soap. But I’ve got two P3Cs and one has the 3T ventus.
.
I suspect that the UCI doesn’t want to bite the hand that feeds them.
while logic would dictate that, in my observation, the UCI rarely follows any kind of rational path.
in my observation, the UCI rarely follows any kind of rational path.
If you follow the decision making of sports admin bodies at all levels, in many different sports, long enough you will definitely come to this conclusion.
Although it is unclear what the re-interpretation of the rules will lead to, we do know that if the new interpretation comes into effect, the old Cervelos will continue to be legal to be used. This may require a new seatpost that has been developed, and which will fit into the old frames.
Obviously, the vast majority of manufacturers make frames with details that could be affected by a re-interpretation of the rules, and you would have to check with each indivually how they would react to it. And maybe there is no adjustment necessary. For Cervelo there is no question; we are the world’s largest manufacturer of time trial bikes, and our bikes will remain to be legal for use in all time trials.
That said, for all triathlons and for the vast, vast majority of time trials in the world, the UCI rules don’t apply. I would be surprised to hear there is anybody on this forum that has come across a UCI commissaire - ever.
I would be surprised to hear there is anybody on this forum that has come across a UCI commissaire -ever.
but some of us have come across officials that are supposed to be enforcing (idiotic) UCI rules. so whether we have ever met a UCI commissaire in person is really not so important. what is important is whether the official at the race lets us compete.
I would be surprised to hear there is anybody on this forum that has come across a UCI commissaire -ever.
but some of us have come across officials that are supposed to be enforcing (idiotic) UCI rules. so whether we have ever met a UCI commissaire in person is really not so important. what is important is whether the official at the race lets us compete.
I remember quite a few years ago Specialized sold a bike with a round seatpost that had a plastic cover that you slipped on it that mad it aero. At that time disc covers weren’t allowed. I remeber wondering how anyone could think that cover wasn’t solely an aerodynamic aid.
What this all leads up to is, if I had the means I’d measure every aero seatpost out their and come up with a slip on cover that makes them legal, then pray that the UCI takes a hard line. Hello condo on the beach.
Styrrell