I think it looks great and very tasteful paint and graphics.
4000 LTD: Available in limited production, Shimano Di2, Zipp Wheels, 3T Mistral Bar, Gold Zipperman Chain, Recon Alum race day cassette, and more
4000 Pro SL: Available in SRAM Red, Zipp Vuka Bars, Mavic Wheels & also in Shimano Ultegra with Profile Bars, Mavic Wheels.
…and the 4000 tested 20% faster than the Cervelo P3.
…and the 4000 tested 20% faster than the Cervelo P3.
Data or it didn’t happen.
Aslo, where did they hide the battery for the Di2? Or was it just too ugly and they decided to keep it off for the press photos?
Data is coming. Will release right after Interbike and @ Hawaii Ironman.
We work @ the A2 Tunnel in NC.
Battery position took me some time to figure out where to place it. I didn’t want it to interfere with the tunnel data and the aesthetics. It’s “hidden” on the left side chainstay tucked in to keep it aero but also to protect it.
The LTD looks sweet but the crankset/chainring needs some new graphics to match the rest of the bike.
It appears the Di2 shift cables are not installed, however.
Is there provision for those routed internally? Can they be run the same way as the standard steel cables?
Are there any bottle mounts?
Why do you attack little details like this? Real men drink their urine and have no need for bottles!
FWIW - I think the is one on the downtube.
Bob
You need this bike in the original Kestrel candy apple red (oooops, that was a “back in the day” post). Seriously though, as nice as this bike looks, it will be hotter in the original Kestrel red.
Ha. Of Course I agree, but I need a place to store it. I can’t drink that fast. 
Sharad, When you release the data please include weight of the frame and fork.
Also, the pic’s indicate there are no water bottle mounts on the down tube or seat tube. When you did the wind tunnel testing where did you mount the water bottles?
Thanks,
Rex
**When you release the data please include weight of the frame and fork. **
Why? It’s probably within a pound of other aero frames and so the weight really doesn’t matter. If I was an aero frame manufacturer, I would not release weight numbers either.
When you did the wind tunnel testing where did you mount the water bottles?
I’m guessing they didn’t. You can’t put a big bottle`anywhere on the frame and still make it aero. Between the bars is the way to go.
Chad
Point I was making is that they probably did test with a behind the seat and with a aero bottle on the bars. I’m betting one of those tested better than the other. I would like to know which one is the preferred set up with the numbers from the tunnel.
There is a set of bottle cage mounts on the down tube.
I have not tested other then the Speedfil which Dave tested on his Airfoil.
Planning another trip in the next few months.
First Interbike, then HI Ironman, trip to China, Clearwater,and then a trip up North.
Maybea quick vacation in there and then back to the tunnel.
Sharad,
Can we get some stack and reach numbers? I am looking into new bikes for next year and really like the looks of the new bike. Question is will it fit me? I am of the longish leg and short torso bunch. Would you say this bike is of the short and tall design or the long and short design?
Hey I’m doing China + Clearwater too…will be in Shenzhen+Hong Kong Oct 20-24. Bring a Kestrel 4000 for a ride amidst crazy taxi drivers!
Not that I’m in the market for a bike (for like the next 10 years, now), but I think that is one FINE looking ride. However…
…and the 4000 tested 20% faster than the Cervelo P3.
You REALLY should not have Frank Day write your marketing copy. Outrageous unsubstantiated claims are generally frowned upon by those who know better.
I have a spot open for a bike sponsor! Wow that’s sweet!
I think it looks great and very tasteful paint and graphics.
Not really interested in anything with the Di2 on it, but THIS bike is absolutely sweet! Hell of a drop though.
John
I only say what is true. Test results coming with real facts from A2 Wind Tunnel.
I only say what is true. Test results coming with real facts from A2 Wind Tunnel.
But “true” is meaningless in the context of what was written. I.e., I could tell you that I tested a Tufo and it rolled 100% better than a Michelin Pro3Race, but if neglect to tell you that I only put 5psi in each, that then doesn’t really mean much.
For example, the 4000 might have tested 20% faster than the P3 at 30deg of yaw, which is great, except that you almost never see 30deg of yaw in real world. Or it could have tested 20% faster across a range of yaws that were also not particularly relevant. Or it could have tested 20% faster across a relevant range of yaw angles in a carefully controlled and executed comparison. But we don’t know. When you write something that vague, you totally undermine your own credibility. Let’s say it actually did test an average of 20% faster across the range of 0-15deg of yaw for a complete bike with identical wheels, bars, etc. Let’s say it actually was a rigorous test. I think people are less likely to be trusting since you’ve put out a number without ANY CONTEXT WHATSOEVER, and then said that you will provide the data later. If the data was good, it should be easy to provide it now. The fact that you put out a meaningless claim and say “the data is coming” is just foolish. Look at how Specialized handled the Shiv - data was available almost immediately once the bike was announced. Now that you’ve made the claims, if the data is not good - or it is only true on a technicality, i.e. 20% faster at one yaw angle during one run - you will be skewered. There WILL be flaws in your data and your methodology. There ALWAYS are. And I think people will be less inclined to forgive them given the “shoot first, ask questions later” approach you’ve taken. It’s a nice looking bike. And the first new Kestrel in quite some time. It’s an obvious improvement on the Airfoil. Why not just let it stand on those facts until you actually are willing to engage in a rigorous discussion of aerodynamics?