I am sure I have read that the new Specialed TT bike designed with help from MIT - do you think this input would put it the same performance league as the P3C, TTX and DA (I presume these are probably all fairly similar performance wise)?
do you think this input would put it the same performance league as the P3C…
EASY there chief…this is ST and comparing* anything* to the P3C is analagous to walking the thin line of blasphemy.
No way. The 17 Specialized decals will cause too much drag…
Jodi
Only 17??? They must have cut back…
Would you make a bike that ugly if it wasn’t fast? Here’s a question: what’s gonna be faster- the new Specialized, or the new Orbea? Because that bike is puurrty.
chance are it will be… most frame on the market are on the same league… the difference are so minimal that a triathlete like you or me will never see the difference, so let s be honest and just buy what is new and cool!
My bet? Faster. Specialized doesn’t mess around when they set out to be the best. Look at what they have done for full suspension MTB? All MTB for that matter… Their road bikes are amazing too. Aero bikes were the one area they lagged behind and now we all know why. They were taking their time to get it right. And I bet they did… (decals and all) 
I wonder why they got out of the helmet game? When they released the sub six it was AWESOME - and nothing on the market touched it for ages.
Well the Cervelo Mafia will tell you that its not even close. A P3C will save you at least 3 seconds on an IM.
The only “flaw” in the design could be the sloped downtube. Seems to me that John Cobb several years back claimed that the sloped downtube on compact frames was slightly less aero. What that means in the real world I dunno.
I wonder why they got out of the helmet game? When they released the sub six it was AWESOME - and nothing on the market touched it for ages.
are you talking about specialized getting out of helmets? cause they ahve a full line and are coming out with a new one that is pretty sweet and some of the tour riders are wearing, i think predictor lotto is one.
http://www.specialized.com/bc/SBCEqSection.jsp?sid=EquipHelmetAll
The only “flaw” in the design could be the sloped downtube. Seems to me that John Cobb several years back claimed that the sloped downtube on compact frames was slightly less aero. What that means in the real world I dunno.
Maybe, but have you seen how thin that sucker is? The wind has to hit something (sloping top tube or seattube), seems to me that a the way Spec did this is more likely either the same or possibly even more aero (like an extension of the ‘fairing’ that leads to the top of the rear wheel). When you look from the front you can’t even see the top tube. It’s not round and it’s extremely narrow. I guess we’ll see when they publish the numbers…
To my eye, the specialized may indeed be just as aero as the P3C, and maybe a bit more so the way they position the brakes.
The Orbea I don’t think will be as aero as either of these bike, it looks faux-aero to me. The angular shapes and such on it look cool but optimized aero shapes tend to be more organic than that.
My bet? Faster. Specialized doesn’t mess around when they set out to be the best. Look at what they have done for full suspension MTB? All MTB for that matter… Their road bikes are amazing too. Aero bikes were the one area they lagged behind and now we all know why. They were taking their time to get it right. And I bet they did… (decals and all)
Yup…they really did their “homework” on those fugly Roval Star wheels …
More aero than the original trispoke…yeah, right.
I believe they are in fact more aero, by a little, than the trispoke at low yaw angles.
edit: I remember wrong. This is the wind tunnel test I was remembering:
My bet? Faster. Specialized doesn’t mess around when they set out to be the best. Look at what they have done for full suspension MTB? All MTB for that matter… Their road bikes are amazing too. Aero bikes were the one area they lagged behind and now we all know why. They were taking their time to get it right. And I bet they did… (decals and all)
Yup…they really did their “homework” on those fugly Roval Star wheels …
More aero than the original trispoke…yeah, right.
Yeah, actually the Rovals may be faster than the first tri-spokes… I’m not gonna debate their looks (it’s in the eye of the beholder) but they appear to have similar exposure to the wind relative to width of spokes at hub and rim), the rim is deep section, and they move a lot of the rotational weight to the center rather than the perimeter. I haven’t seen numbers, and I haven’t tried the wheels, but I’m certainly open minded to their claim.
Sure Spec likes to make their stuff look good (again in the eye of the beholder) but not at the expense of function. In my opinion, focusing on function first and doing it with an eye for style is a plus. If a bike excites you you will enjoy riding it more (or another way to put it, the more people that are excited by bikes the more people will ride). As one non-cycling friend of mine once said after seeing my Tarmac E5, “Damn, that bike is sexy!” I replied, “and it is one of the best performing bikes I have ever ridden”. Both of us were right.
BTW, Spec ‘invented’ the original trispoke remember? They have one hanging in their museum at Spec HQ in Morgan Hill (along with a bunch of other cool stuff). It’s just one of many innovations the company has brought to our sport. Its not all smoke and mirrors, they do their homework and ‘publish’ the results. I look forward to seeing the numbers on the new products!
What’s the story behind only racing wheels will fit due to the cutout of the chain stay?
By the time you get to the upper end TT bike frames (Trek, Cervelo, Specialized, Litespeed, Felt, QR and probably a lot more that I missed), there really isn’t much different in the aerodynamics, and whatever aerodynamic benefit you see is completely negated once you put a rider in it.
We’ve tested different bike frames with identical setups: there’s a difference (albeit a small one) between the bikes when we test the bikes alone, but that becomes absorbed within our margin of error once we put a rider on. Which means it’s far more important to get a bike that fits you, rather than getting the most aero bike and using all sorts of workarounds so that it can fit you (which would compromise on the bike’s handling).
The only thing a more aero bike frame will probably save you is fuel when it’s sitting on your car bike rack when you drive to and from your races. (=
Despite all the TV spots, I doubt Tom Boonen would benefit from Specialized, Felt, or Cervelo if he had us for competition. He could easily beat 99.9% of the people here on on 1975 steel Raleigh with clip-ons as long as it was prologue distance…
Sorry folks, aero helps, but most of us just don’t have the engine. However, if I had the dough, I’d go buy the new Specialized right now just to look as fast as Boonen…
//Yeah, actually the Rovals may be faster than the first tri-spokes… I’m not gonna debate their looks (it’s in the eye of the beholder) but they appear to have similar exposure to the wind relative to width of spokes at hub and rim), the rim is deep section, and they move a lot of the rotational weight to the center rather than the perimeter.//
Do you consider the shifting of rotational weight to the center to be a significant effect? How much research have you done on this subject?
.