https://rustersports.com/...on-Savings-Watts.pdf
http://rustersports.com/product/aero-beam-box/
The pictures are hard to see because they are so small but they claim 5W for their aero box to fill in the gap between the aerobars and frame.
Looks like another step in the right direction. Love to see the iteration within the same model.
That’s great but 150$ for a piece of plastic which should have come with the bike anyway?
Also looks like you have to re-cable your bike to install it?
Maurice
Yes, I test rode this bike at IM Wisconsin last year. The bike felt great but honestly, I felt like I was test riding a car without a hood. Looked very unfinished and they agreed. They told me they were working on a solution which is what this appears to be. It should be included with the bike.
This is so embarrassing.
So now we are supposed to believe that, prior to them finding another 40 grams of drag savings, this bike was faster than anything else on the market. There should be a slowtwitch support group called “lies that jordan rapp told me”
This is so embarrassing.
So now we are supposed to believe that, prior to them finding another 40 grams of drag savings, this bike was faster than anything else on the market. There should be a slowtwitch support group called “lies that jordan rapp told me”
x2. Couldn’t have said it any better myself.
That’s great but 150$ for a piece of plastic which should have come with the bike anyway?
Also looks like you have to re-cable your bike to install it?
Maurice
That’s 5W at 30mph…so 1.5W at 20mph (a more typical IM speed).
Looks like you could cut a slot to avoid recabling (then just tape over the slot).
Given that it’s non-structural, could have just molded it with cheap plastic or 3D printed.
Personally I’d love to see someone put a 3D print file out there that anyone could use.
The Shiv has a similar plastic “box” that comes in several sizes with the frame so you can adjust depending on your spacer stack.
You’re completely missing the point. The speed they calibrated to is an industry stand to quantify deltas in product on a consistent basis, even as that measure (grams of drag) is itself incredibly stupid and inaccurate for real world application
But for instance, the difference between the DA and IA is about 50 grams of drag (from memory?). The industry quoted difference between the P5 and SC is similar
So before they added this critical component to find such a massive discernible difference in drag, we are supposed to buy that this completely impractical, offensively expensive bicycle was already very fast (I.e. According to Rapp, faster than the shiv). Bullshit, bullshit, bullshit
Also, the bike looked like shit without this piece of hardware (if you weren’t running that specific p5 front end, which is itself ridiculous because it’s UCI legal…why Cervelo and 3T combined can’t do better than some asshat in Highlands Ranch Colorado is beyond me)
This bike is shit
You’re completely missing the point. The speed they calibrated to is an industry stand to quantify deltas in product on a consistent basis, even as that measure (grams of drag) is itself incredibly stupid and inaccurate for real world application
Yes, 30mph is a standard (a reasonable speed for TdF FOP TTers like Fabian and Tony). I was just pointing out what the watts savings is likely to be for a “typical” Diamond owner who’s considering cost/benefit.
My pref. is reporting time saved over 40K…since that at least scales up a bit for slower riders. CdA is ideal…but not really usable for the non-engineers.
You’re completely missing the point. The speed they calibrated to is an industry stand to quantify deltas in product on a consistent basis, even as that measure (grams of drag) is itself incredibly stupid and inaccurate for real world application
Yes, 30mph is a standard (a reasonable speed for TdF FOP TTers like Fabian and Tony). I was just pointing out what the watts savings is likely to be for a “typical” Diamond owner who’s considering cost/benefit.
My pref. is reporting time saved over 40K…since that at least scales up a bit for slower riders. CdA is ideal…but not really usable for the non-engineers.
Cost/benefit analysis behind buying a part that absolutely completely should be included in this absurd bicycle? There’s no empirical analysis to be mace…you bought the wrong product to begin with. You’re already $6k+ into this awful frame, might as well bring it up to par with the Ventum One. Don’t even get me started on the Super Fork.
The only people I know who are happy with their Dimond purchase are dentists.
Just curious, why so much hate for Dimond and Ventum? Don’t give me a troll answer, give me an honest opinion.
My antipathy isn’t limited to those bikes. I went on a hate filled rampage about the Giant trinity advanced just yesterday. I’m equal opportunity like that
That doesn’t answer my question.
wow, they have the balls to charge 150 dollars for a 3d printed spacer?!? its like 5-6 dollars of high quality filament, and 4-5 hours of print time…
The Dimond is one of the most impractical bikes on the market. You can’t ride it on a modern trainer. You have to cut the seat post to size, which limits your flexibility to change the fit, to lend it to a friend in a time of need, or to ever sell it. Only 2 bottles for training? Not practical. The head tube/steerer junction looks ridiculous, and the expensive super fork doesn’t solve the aesthetic issues without this new piece.
The Ventum One: well, the whole front end. At least Dimond figured out the front brake…Ventum didn’t even get that far. Complete China carbon trash.
They are both SO expensive. I mean, way way more than a Speed Concept expensive.
Both companies have incredible aero data – I say that literally. Ventum continues to go to a shit wind tunnel and refuse to release data; Dimond’s release here stinks to high heaven…oh great, fantastic news, now it’s much much faster than a P5-3!
Given all this, why would anyone buy one? Well, dentists need to show off their uniqueness. That’s about the only reason I can think of. If you have that kind of money to spend on being unique, why not just custom paint a P5?
I saw this classifieds ad the other day for a Dimond. The guy said he not only bought the bike because of Jordan Rapp, he also bought the same size (dude was 6’3") and couldn’t get the bike to fit. Perfect Dimond / Ventum customer: complete idiot sheep.
I forgot to mention my suspicion that lots of people are buying these bikes because it is trendy to have these bikes…which is just such an embarrassing thing. For being such insufferable egotists, most triathletes have little capacity for independent thought when it comes to their consumerism. Roka Aviators OMFG I want to be like Jesse please take my money!
The Dimond is one of the most impractical bikes on the market. You can’t ride it on a modern trainer. You have to cut the seat post to size, which limits your flexibility to change the fit, to lend it to a friend in a time of need, or to ever sell it. Only 2 bottles for training? Not practical. The head tube/steerer junction looks ridiculous, and the expensive super fork doesn’t solve the aesthetic issues without this new piece.
The Ventum One: well, the whole front end. At least Dimond figured out the front brake…Ventum didn’t even get that far. Complete China carbon trash.
They are both SO expensive. I mean, way way more than a Speed Concept expensive.
Both companies have incredible aero data – I say that literally. Ventum continues to go to a shit wind tunnel and refuse to release data; Dimond’s release here stinks to high heaven…oh great, fantastic news, now it’s much much faster than a P5-3!
Given all this, why would anyone buy one? Well, dentists need to show off their uniqueness. That’s about the only reason I can think of. If you have that kind of money to spend on being unique, why not just custom paint a P5?
I saw this classifieds ad the other day for a Dimond. The guy said he not only bought the bike because of Jordan Rapp, he also bought the same size (dude was 6’3") and couldn’t get the bike to fit. Perfect Dimond / Ventum customer: complete idiot sheep.
That guy ^ is me. I’m glad you know so much about me based on my bike purchasing habits.
You must have misunderstood as I said got the Medium based on Jordan Rapp’s fit as he and I have identical body sizes and I wanted to see if I could adapt to a more aggressive position. I didn’t buy the Dimond because of him. I bought it because I liked the way it looked, the ease of maintenance/and travel, and that it is made in the USA. I didn’t need it as I already had a great bike that led me to a KQ last year but I wanted try something new. This bike is faster based on both subjective and objective measures but ultimately the sizing wasn’t sustainable for me for IM distance. I’m sorry this caused you so much concern and anguish.
I’ll head back out to pasture with the rest of the sheep now…
The Dimond is one of the most impractical bikes on the market. You can’t ride it on a modern trainer. You have to cut the seat post to size, which limits your flexibility to change the fit, to lend it to a friend in a time of need, or to ever sell it. Only 2 bottles for training? Not practical. The head tube/steerer junction looks ridiculous, and the expensive super fork doesn’t solve the aesthetic issues without this new piece.
The Ventum One: well, the whole front end. At least Dimond figured out the front brake…Ventum didn’t even get that far. Complete China carbon trash.
They are both SO expensive. I mean, way way more than a Speed Concept expensive.
Both companies have incredible aero data – I say that literally. Ventum continues to go to a shit wind tunnel and refuse to release data; Dimond’s release here stinks to high heaven…oh great, fantastic news, now it’s much much faster than a P5-3!
Given all this, why would anyone buy one? Well, dentists need to show off their uniqueness. That’s about the only reason I can think of. If you have that kind of money to spend on being unique, why not just custom paint a P5?
I saw this classifieds ad the other day for a Dimond. The guy said he not only bought the bike because of Jordan Rapp, he also bought the same size (dude was 6’3") and couldn’t get the bike to fit. Perfect Dimond / Ventum customer: complete idiot sheep.
First, the Dimond is impractical in the sense that you can’t use it on a trainer. I won’t buy a bike I can’t use on my Kickr. The Ventum can be used on any trainer. You can also change out the aerobars on the Ventum to anything you want.
Next, small companies have to charge more to recoup research and development costs. They don’t have the large capital that Trek, Specialized, Cervelo, and Felt have. I bet when these companies first started their bikes were expensive as well. Costs are high at first but they will come down over time. Most companies start with high end and work their way down to middle and lower end models. Shimano Dura Ace to 105 is a great example of this.
All of the top of the line bikes with similar equipment to the Ventum and Dimond are close in price.
Next, Ventum has sent a bike to Jim@ERO for testing. We are all waiting on the data and analysis from Jim.
People want to stand out. There is nothing wrong with Ventum and Dimond bikes. People don’t want to always have what everyone else has.
The next generation of tri bikes are going to be even more expensive.
The Dimond is one of the most impractical bikes on the market. You can’t ride it on a modern trainer. You have to cut the seat post to size, which limits your flexibility to change the fit, to lend it to a friend in a time of need, or to ever sell it. Only 2 bottles for training? Not practical. The head tube/steerer junction looks ridiculous, and the expensive super fork doesn’t solve the aesthetic issues without this new piece.
The Ventum One: well, the whole front end. At least Dimond figured out the front brake…Ventum didn’t even get that far. Complete China carbon trash.
They are both SO expensive. I mean, way way more than a Speed Concept expensive.
Both companies have incredible aero data – I say that literally. Ventum continues to go to a shit wind tunnel and refuse to release data; Dimond’s release here stinks to high heaven…oh great, fantastic news, now it’s much much faster than a P5-3!
Given all this, why would anyone buy one? Well, dentists need to show off their uniqueness. That’s about the only reason I can think of. If you have that kind of money to spend on being unique, why not just custom paint a P5?
I saw this classifieds ad the other day for a Dimond. The guy said he not only bought the bike because of Jordan Rapp, he also bought the same size (dude was 6’3") and couldn’t get the bike to fit. Perfect Dimond / Ventum customer: complete idiot sheep.
I forgot to mention my suspicion that lots of people are buying these bikes because it is trendy to have these bikes…which is just such an embarrassing thing. For being such insufferable egotists, most triathletes have little capacity for independent thought when it comes to their consumerism. Roka Aviators OMFG I want to be like Jesse please take my money!
I’ve always liked the look of the Dimond but two things turned me off… the original fork was just hideous looking and didn’t match the bike and the space behind the steerer tube. The solved both of those issues for me with the Super Fork and this Beam Box widget. I like to buy a new bike every three years or so and my recent history was a 2009 Felt B2, 2011 Trek Speed Concept, 2014 Trek Speed Concept (bought in 2013), and most recently a 2016 Dimond. I just wanted one so I got one.
To address some of your points and how they pertain to me:
-
The trainer issue. I never ride my tri bike on a trainer. I can ride in the aero position for 99% of an Ironman but can’t ride for 10 minutes in aero on a trainer so I scrapped riding a tri bike in favor of a roadie on my trainer many years ago.
-
Seat post. I didn’t have to cut mine.
-
Two bottles for training. I agree this is far less than ideal but there are ways around it. A double bottle holder behind the seat option would give you four bottles (with BTA and down tube options). I’m only training for 70.3’s for the foreseeable future so not much of a concern for me at this point.
-
Yes, it’s expensive but it’s my money.
-
Aero data. Dimond has been doing a lot of testing in the A2 tunnel the past few months. I’m interested to see what gets released. I actually saw this data about the Beam Box several weeks ago but I don’t think it was for public consumption at that point. Obviously, this data was released to sell the Beam Box. Nothing more, nothing less. Dimond has done a bunch of other testing far beyond this widget though. My understanding is there’s some good data coming but I guess we will wait and see. I hope they just release everything (or most everything) and let us dissect it up. I just hope they don’t do what Ventum did and say we have this awesome data and never release it. At least Dimond went to A2 and not Faster.
-
I bought one because it is different from other bikes. Bikes are my one guilty pleasure in life. It’s also a very comfortable riding bike. I have it setup fit wise almost identical to my Trek SC, and it does ride smoother than the Trek. I’m not sure people are buying them because they’re trendy… wouldn’t that be why everyone and their grandmother has a P5 or SC or Shiv. Dimond is a boutique bike, and comes with a boutique price. All and all, there are not a lot of Dimonds out there. I live in the Houston metro area and I know of four of us that have them.
-
Height is certainly only one piece of the puzzle when it comes to fit but all things being equal I don’t see how someone 6’3" tall as Jordan or the other guy can fit on a Size M Dimond. I would think that frame is too small for someone that tall but with the many different bar and stem configs it’s probably a workable solution. Jordan seems to make it work. The other guy couldn’t. I’m 6’ and I ride the M size and it fits me perfectly. I knew it would fit me great going in since the size L Trek SC and size M Dimond have identical geometry.
- Aero data. Dimond has been doing a lot of testing in the A2 tunnel the past few months. I’m interested to see what gets released. I actually saw this data about the Beam Box several weeks ago but I don’t think it was for public consumption at that point. Obviously, this data was released to sell the Beam Box. Nothing more, nothing less. Dimond has done a bunch of other testing far beyond this widget though. My understanding is there’s some good data coming but I guess we will wait and see. I hope they just release everything (or most everything) and let us dissect it up. I just hope they don’t do what Ventum did and say we have this awesome data and never release it. At least Dimond went to A2 and not Faster.
Dimond’s wind tunnel data on their website comes from Faster.