Agree that is one ugly bike. I don’t see them selling many of those.
I hear ya. But, the reality is that others have beaten them to the ugly punch such that this isn’t as offensive to me as it might have been 5 years ago. Diamondback, Tririg, Ceepo, Ventum, Cervelo, etc have all paved the way for “ugly†tri bikes, even taking into consideration personal preferences. I couldn’t stand the looks of the Andean when it first came out. Now, I sorta like the looks. I probably won’t buy this but aesthetics won’t be the reason if I don’t.
Does the bike require proprietary wheels to accommodate the wide fork? Is there any way to use an adapter for standard wheelsets?
The front wheel offset seems HUGE. If you wanted to ride this bike on a technical course, how will it handle?
No, you can use any dusc brake wheel set as used in other road bikes. The FFWD wheels in the pics are just standard high and wide rims.
It looks larger then it is, but as posted above you can get your frame rider specific so you can choose the front center you would like matching the rest of your fit coordinates.
Perception of speed could be visually achieved by having strong horizontality, exactly like you guys did with the logo.
The bike has the opposite - strong vertical lines. That’s why it looks a bit weird.
But triathlon in general is very anti-aesthetic. All those bright suit colors, large helmets, large logos, etc. So it’s not an issue.
In general I like it. A lot of interesting innovations.
Hello Jeroen,
I had such an old white Canyon Speedmax, and when I changed 5 years ago to a P5 there was a noticeable difference in comfort: the Cervelo swallowed bumps a lot better than the Canyon. I read that the PX/P3X is also very comfortable.
So you feel my question coming: How is the KU in this respect?
Hello Jeroen,
I had such an old white Canyon Speedmax, and when I changed 5 years ago to a P5 there was a noticeable difference in comfort: the Cervelo swallowed bumps a lot better than the Canyon. I read that the PX/P3X is also very comfortable.
So you feel my question coming: How is the KU in this respect?
It is stiff, power transfer is extremely good.
I own a P5disc, Andean and have ridden in the last 5 years Trek SC, Felt IA and recently also P3X. So you can say I can compare a bit.
I have quite some long and intensive rides done on the TF1 and it imo not less comfortable then my P5d or any other of the mentioned bikes. In some maybe even more I would say.
But that might be also due to the elastomer absorber that sits below the seatpost.
I have to be honest, at first I didn’t think it was that useful as a ‘shock absorber‘ but in this case I had to admit to Richard McAinsh, the designer of the bike and also the designer of many 3T carbon (aero)bars, was right. The frame is super stiff so that shock absorber just does its job very well that you don’t feel any negatives on that frame stifness.
This frame seems built to be aggressive with position.
Not necessarily, because it is built rider specific you can have it more or less aggressive to your liking. And still have room to adjÌust your pad stack and reach over quite a large range.
That is the beauty of this rider specific frame design. You and your fitter determine how you want to be positioned, what range of adjustability you need for the future and the frame is built that way for you.
You can even decide the front center distance so you can predict the bike handling.
Just saw this press release come across…a collaboration between Alex Bok (TeamTBB) and a Formula One engineer Robert McAinsh. Quite a bit of info and data on the website.
i think you mean richard mcainsh. he wasn’t just a formula one engineer, he designed a lot of really intriguing stuff for 3T way back when. i can’t be certain of my memory, but i believe the 3T ventus aerobar, which was ahead of its time, was a mcainsh project. he didn’t just come over from ferrari. he’s been conversant with bike design for awhile.
i can’t be certain of my memory, but i believe the 3T ventus aerobar, which was ahead of its time, was a mcainsh project. he didn’t just come over from ferrari. he’s been conversant with bike design for awhile.
Your memory hasn’t failed. He turned to the light side well over a decade ago.
Also the Verve infocrank powermeter
It’s brilliant. But not for the simple wide-fork or high-top tube reasons. It’s expensive and the aero testing is expensive too, but the aero testing is 100x more valuable than the bike itself. You go, you learn, you see the process, you improve, but most importantly you learn how to do clear, iterative, repeatable aero testing. Take that knowledge home with you and continue testing and the gains will multiply. Ride away with a new bike and 1 day of testing and you’ll be a bit faster but leaving a lot on the table. There’s just so many variables you can test.
The actual bike is a solidly built chinese carbon frame of UCI-approved quality. No issues at all with the actual build. TBH my only gripe is the steerer box design (a cool touch to add in vortex generators) requires a lot of grease to stop creaking. Not a big deal, one of the best bikes I’ve ridden.
(Source: Pro cycling or triathlon on/off since 2006. Best bike I’ve ridden is a S-Works Venge. Ku is 2nd. Worst is a Delihea from AliExpress)
Correct me if I am wrong, but the same aero testing could be done on any bike. Last time I checked it was not cheap. The going rate for an aero session is significantly less
So it’s not an issue.
We’ll never sway those driven by aesthetics but for those that just look for performance we’re doing OK.