I’m just about to take my new TT bike home. Here’s a pic.: http://gallery.consumerreview.com/roadbike/gallery/files/MVC-001S(8).asp
I’ve got to say, the HED aero bars are GREAT… well worth the money!!
JB
Wow,
Awesome stem.
Be sure you use lots of Ti-Prep on that ti post! I’d also recomment trimming it down to minimize the amount stuck in the frame. You only need 80mm beneath the slot in the seat tube.
It looks fast standing still.
How much did that cost? 5000 dollars atleast (I would think).
And those Hed aerobars… they look a lot better in the magazine ads.
Nice bike though.
Love the bike…but the saddle looks like Gonzo.
Did you go with 700c? Guessing by the cutout…what size is it?
Cost?? Well, it wasn’t 5K… but then many of the parts are from my former TT bike (Softride Power V).
The HED bars should look as nice as any ad after the cables get a final routing and some tape is applied.
Size is 55, 700 wheels.
Gonzo saddle?? Ya, I suppose it does look kinda like that!!
Although, it should do-the-trick when aeroed-out… some padding, flex, nose drop, etc. I’ll need to get some ‘real’ miles to see how it really feels.
JB
I was at Gravitylab last Friday and I saw your bike. The picture does not nearly do it justice. That bad boy is very sweet.
Jay, the bike’s almost as hot as you.
I’m just about to take my new TT bike home. Here’s a pic.: http://gallery.consumerreview.com/roadbike/gallery/files/MVC-001S(8).asp
Uhmm, I’d say the '03 model looks better. And why did they go with internal cable routing in '04? They had this in '02 (which Tom didn’t like) changed it for the '03 model and now changed it again for the '04.
regards,
Frank
WOW!! That is sweet.
Sweet frame! No DA 10sp?? the new DA crank would look hot on this bike!
Frank,
“Uhmm, I’d say the '03 model looks better.”
Well, some people might agree with you as far as ‘looks’ go. However, the bladed top tube (the main change for 04’) on the 03’ model served very little purpose. Aerodynamically it added nothing. As far as stiffness goes, again, the 03’ model has no significant advantage… the down tube provides the majority of the stiffness for any bicycles frame. The only thing that the 03’ model has over the 04’ is weight. I have also ‘heard’ that Mr. HED himself helped Litespeed with the 04’ design.
“And why did they go with internal cable routing in '04?”
Not sure… I was under the impression that most TT/Tri frames are internal???
JB
The 04 Blade cable routing is completely different from the 02 model and very clean indeed. Plus the 04 Blade is a good bit lighter. (weight differences vary from size to size)
Cheers,
Herbert
Litespeed
Frank,
“Uhmm, I’d say the '03 model looks better.”
Well, some people might agree with you as far as ‘looks’ go. However, the bladed top tube (the main change for 04’) on the 03’ model served very little purpose. Aerodynamically it added nothing. As far as stiffness goes, again, the 03’ model has no significant advantage… the down tube provides the majority of the stiffness for any bicycles frame. The only thing that the 03’ model has over the 04’ is weight. I have also ‘heard’ that Mr. HED himself helped Litespeed with the 04’ design.
JB
Hi JB,
of course all is absolutely true what you write … but … uhmm, the 03’ looks better …
regards,
Frank
PS: Great Bike !
Very nice…it’s funny, I looked at the pre-owned bike website the other day and it thad a 2001 Blade. I remember when the bladed down tube on this bike was all the rage—now it looks very outdated compared to yours. Now bladed downtubes for triathlon specific bikes are almost the norm along with bladed seat tubes and wheel cut-outs.
It is interesting that your bike has a teardrop shaped top tube. I wonder if this is cosmetic or if it adds overall strength.
**“**What made you switch from a beam bike back to a standard frame?”
There were a couple different things. I like the beam idea/concept in many ways. On long rides (100-200 miles) a beam is hard to beat… takes SOOOO MUCH fatigue away from the body. I also think it’s a good way to go for Tri-s. I’d be very surprised if my new Blade (or any other bike) is going to be as AERO as my Ol’ Softride… it really did slip through the wind. However, for TT specific riding/racing, there are some limitations. First there is the ‘bounce’. I’ve read and heard from countless sources that any bouncing associated with beam bikes will disappear the more you ride and the smoother your pedal stroke gets. This was not my experience. The bounce I experienced would become less, but it never completely disappeared. There was also the issue of weight. My Power V is an outdated model as far as Softrides go… there are still some nice features about it, but the bottom line is that it was heavy compared to what is available today. I also found that try as I might, I could not get the bike set up in a TT position that would compliment my road bike position. It was CLOSE to being the same, but not enough (this might have a little to do with the ‘bounce’ never completely disappearing). The bike is extremely adjustable… maybe tooooo adjustable. It took me over 3 months to get the bike dialed in. The issue of having to factor in a ‘preload’ on the beam can be challenging. My weight doesn’t change a great deal during the season, but 5-10 pounds made a difference on how the beam works/reacts. The Power V was pretty cutting edge when it was new… but that was some time ago. I think even Softride would admit that it’s not the best they have to offer today. Those points aside, for the type of riding/racing I’m planning to do (10-40k TT specific), a traditional (non-beam) frame/bike seemed to make more sense.
JB****