UCI has no call on IM events right?
Seen at the 70.3 Worlds…
Ironman’s Competition Rules, Section 5.03(b) possibly applies to some of that DIY stuff.
I love this. Let the people have their fun. Don’t put them in a box.
I just want to know what his bike split was now 
Just reposted from another group…as a DIY guy myself im trying to seek the original guy so I can share ideas.
Ironman’s Competition Rules, Section 5.03(b) possibly applies to some of that DIY stuff.
i’d consider all those bits to be non-compliant fairings… but IM seem to seldom enforce their rules
They enforce imaginary center lines?
.
Not that I was planning on doing anything MDot related anyway, but if that is how they don’t enforce rules, I want no part of that game. It’s crazy that he printed them in green and did not try to hide them at all.
I can live with the arm rests since buying the custom ones is as much as a bike used to be. It is kind of like the wheel cover/disc argument. The FD cover is fine as long as it is holding a spare tire. The crankset and RD cover are just flat out no’s.
I could live with the rear ‘thing’ as long as it was full of something like water, tools, spare tires, food or something. If it is just a big empty fairing then, well… it is just a big empty fairing.
I’m not sure why his/her fellow competitors did not report the bike to the judges. That’s absurd.
Creativity and ingenuity–10.
Legality–0.
Seems legit, as long as he/she didn’t have a bottle down their jersey! That’s just far beyond what’s acceptable. /pink
Does that RD fairing actually work?
Not that I was planning on doing anything MDot related anyway, but if that is how they don’t enforce rules, I want no part of that game. It’s crazy that he printed them in green and did not try to hide them at all.
I can live with the arm rests since buying the custom ones is as much as a bike used to be. It is kind of like the wheel cover/disc argument. The FD cover is fine as long as it is holding a spare tire. The crankset and RD cover are just flat out no’s.
…
Well, what about this?
https://www.bikeradar.com/...amicspeed-ospw-aero/
And this:
https://shop.visiontechusa.com/...modular-compact-aero
Seems like they have mostly just copied what is available via retail, just not as polished…
Awesome stuff, hope he tested it and didn’t just assume it works. The only complaint I’ll lodge: Doing fairing like this is a gray area of the rules, open to interpretation and whims of officials. Why then make it bright green??? Surely black to match the bike would arouse much less suspicion and possible sanction.
Just reposted from another group…as a DIY guy myself im trying to seek the original guy so I can share ideas.
if it was from a uk tt group on fb the guy posted in the comments had the 3000 plus fastest bike split of the day …
Not that I was planning on doing anything MDot related anyway, but if that is how they don’t enforce rules, I want no part of that game. It’s crazy that he printed them in green and did not try to hide them at all.
I can live with the arm rests since buying the custom ones is as much as a bike used to be. It is kind of like the wheel cover/disc argument. The FD cover is fine as long as it is holding a spare tire. The crankset and RD cover are just flat out no’s.
I could live with the rear ‘thing’ as long as it was full of something like water, tools, spare tires, food or something. If it is just a big empty fairing then, well… it is just a big empty fairing.
I’m not sure why his/her fellow competitors did not report the bike to the judges. That’s absurd.
Creativity and ingenuity–10.
Legality–0.
What are you getting so upset about? You can already buy all of these mods…
Not that I was planning on doing anything MDot related anyway, but if that is how they don’t enforce rules, I want no part of that game. It’s crazy that he printed them in green and did not try to hide them at all.
I can live with the arm rests since buying the custom ones is as much as a bike used to be. It is kind of like the wheel cover/disc argument. The FD cover is fine as long as it is holding a spare tire. The crankset and RD cover are just flat out no’s.
I could live with the rear ‘thing’ as long as it was full of something like water, tools, spare tires, food or something. If it is just a big empty fairing then, well… it is just a big empty fairing.
I’m not sure why his/her fellow competitors did not report the bike to the judges. That’s absurd.
Creativity and ingenuity–10.
Legality–0.
What are you getting so upset about? You can already buy all of these mods…
sure, but that doesn’t make it legal. you can buy all kinds of things that are not race legal.
even the fact that plenty of people do race with similar fairings does not mean that they are legal
Very well. I vaguely remember the crankset, but I’ve never seen the RD cover. At some point the governing bodies are going to have to make a decision.
I read in the RD cover marketing “The cover is legal because it is structural.” Well, that is true but it is clearly there to improve aerodymamics.
It looks like you can get a Trinity Advanced for about four grand. Do all the things this guy did to his bike bring it onto the same level as say, a P5X that will cost you north of 10 grand?
Who knows, but it clearly enters that same realm of $1000 for a disc wheel or $80 for a cover (I know you can find cheaper discs than that now but probably not when they made the rule decision).
My initial judgement was based soley off compliance with the rules.
I think you overestimated how upset it makes me. I was merely looking at it from the standpoint a judge walking through transition. It is a long enough race that you need some storage, but if a rule says no fairings, then it should be followed.
Innovation is not going to stop, but as someone said above, I want to know if it is going to be allowed. If so, then it is game on. My son is studying to be an engineer and recently obsessed with 3D printing. If you can do this stuff, I have a few ideas myself…
I read in the RD cover marketing “The cover is legal because it is structural.” Well, that is true but it is clearly there to improve aerodymamics.
Genuinely unsure and asking, but is something being there to improve aerodynamics negate its structural importance as per the rules? If that’s the case then wouldn’t any non round tube bike be against the rules? Wouldn’t aerobars be against the rules too? Any non box rim wheels? Blades spokes? You’re not the first person I’ve seen saying this if it’s only like that for aero it should be against the rules but curious if that’s actually a thing.
Full disclosure I think all these aero addons are cool from a tech perspective but don’t envy the person that has to draw the line when writing the rules. I think some people like this are clearly in violation of what I think should be a rule.
None of these are stuff that aren’t already available as OEM parts on other bikes. They just looks shitty because they’re green.
UCI has no call on IM events right?
Seen at the 70.3 Worlds…
I think you overestimated how upset it makes me.
Oh O.K., just sounded like you would be prepared to boycott IM over it…"Not that I was planning on doing anything MDot related anyway, but if that is how they don’t enforce rules, I want no part of that game. "
I read in the RD cover marketing “The cover is legal because it is structural.” Well, that is true but it is clearly there to improve aerodymamics.
Genuinely unsure and asking, but is something being there to improve aerodynamics negate its structural importance as per the rules? If that’s the case then wouldn’t any non round tube bike be against the rules? Wouldn’t aerobars be against the rules too? Any non box rim wheels? Blades spokes? You’re not the first person I’ve seen saying this if it’s only like that for aero it should be against the rules but curious if that’s actually a thing.
Full disclosure I think all these aero addons are cool from a tech perspective but don’t envy the person that has to draw the line when writing the rules. I think some people like this are clearly in violation of what I think should be a rule.
The rule only goes in one direction (at least the old UCI interpretation). It can be structural and aero, it cannot be aero and non structural. Airfoil tubes, yes. Airfoil cloak around a tube, no. And no, it’s been tried before, the chainring cover does no “stiffen the crankset”. The line has to be somewhere.
I don’t see the non-pro rules for triathlon changing anytime soon. It’s a participation sport and they don’t want to limit participation by saying you need a USAT/IM/WTC approved bike, or that the bike you’ve ridden for the last 5 years is no longer allowed.
(side note: The UCI actually nipped it in the bud with the Lugano Charter. Bikes of the 90’s were getting wild, like tri bikes of today, and before they overtook double-triangle bikes the governing body came in and governed. Didn’t make everybody happy, but they 90% on traditional bikes were back on even ground with the 10% on exotic beam bikes. Cycling is much less participation driven than triathlon, so an easier job, but the point remains that the tri bike toothpaste is very far out of the tube)