Hey -
just saw that the new Aegis website is up…the new Xaero sure looks sweet to me. In any case, not an advertisement, just saw some Aegis questions up here last week.
Don
edit: www.aegisbicycles.com
Looks ok. I was wondering how the range works i.e. is the T2 the flagship or the Xaero ? Some nice attention to detail although if you’re are going to produce some interesting features (the brake mounting system being one) I’d like to know why. If it’s improved aerodynamics (obviously) I want to know if this has been wind tunnel or velodrome tested. For me it’s great to innovate (and I’m glad companies like Aegis are willing to push things a little) but if you are going to champion it I would like more than anecdotes. I think a firm like this would benefit from more exposure in the race field as they certainly look like nice bikes.
site looks super, hope to get a Zæro next season
.
No windtunnel testing (at least not of prototypes) and no CAD design, that was confirmed in one of the other threads on the bike. It may be a very nice bike, but I am, personally, tired of every new tribike that comes out being the “most comfortable” and “most aerodynamic.” From what I hear, Aegis makes nice bikes, and they make them here in the US. I wish they could pitch that and leave out the “fluff,” which is probably why I don’t work in marketing…
strange that many of the frame angles on the new bike are listed with question marks.
i wonder what that means ?
Totally amatuer photos don’t help. Gives one the impression they are built and marketed in someone’s garage. Needs some pizazz, that’s for sure.
I think a lot of people are missing the point. I don’t recall the exact numbers, but Aegis only produces 1500-2000 frames per year. Better marketing and more exposure (like sponsoring a top level pro) would just mean they would have to build a new factory and hire a bunch more CF workers, resulting in loser quality for awhile during the break in phase of the new workers and processes that would have to be implemented to put out a few thousand more frames per year.
I don’t think that is where Pete wants to go with the company. Maybe I’m wrong, but part of the reason that they can create something like the Zaero is that they aren’t having to expand production all the time.
That said, I would pay a lot of money to be able to get the new frame in 650c. So bummed.
Chris
any idea what there framesets/bikes run, price wise?
It’s just a glitch on that page of the website - it will be updated later today.
got it.
thanks.
Greg, why is the Zaero STA is so steep at 80 degrees?
Rappstar,
Nice to see you’ve mellowed some toward Aegis; i remember your “Aegis is the Danny Devito half of Twins” line…
Many triathletes are riding a frame with a 76 or 78 degree STA and positioning their seat forward to 80 degrees in an attempt to achieve a lower and more aero position. The problem here is that the frame’s geometry is then in conflict with the rider’s intended position, and handling, comfort and proper manipulation of muscle groups are compromised. The ZAERO’s 80 degree STA naturally positions the rider forward, and the 71 degree HTA allows for a longer, more stable front end. Paired with the 46 degree rake Oval fork, the ZAERO’s front end is extended out to compensate for the forward rider position without compromising stablility and comfort. In addition, the ZAERO’s chainstays are shortened to 39cm for two reasons - to balance out the overall wheelbase and to bring the rear wheel back under the rider for better climbing and faster acceleration. The ZAERO is the first production frame to address the needs of the long course triathlete - this bike is designed for this purpose and these athletes. Our thought is simple - build a bike for the racer, not the other way around.
Funny how someone passes judgement on a companies design without Wind tunnel data. Don’t you ride a QR? Funny…I don’t remember that bike being any more aerodynamic than the next one. Maybe you can point me to the article which outlines it as the next latest and greatest thing on the market.
Seems through your results you set up well on the bike and thats all that matters now isn’t it. You would think an athlete at your calibur would understand the bike has very little to do performance and that position and comfort have everything to with it.
How much of the bike affects speed? Next time your at a bike race where the bikes race without riders…give me a call…Now that would be worth watching.
Aegis is a quality bike made by a quality manufacture. Seems like you may have underlying issues with Aegis themselves and not the actual craftmanship of the bike.
I’m happy that the ZAERO is out. Has to be one of the sexiest bikes to hit the market in a long time. Congrats to the Aegis team for a solid piece of work…
It would be nice to have those bikes for wind tunnel testing. Better would be Dan Empfield reviewing them and writing something about the bike.
This Zaero/Xaero looks cool!
Marcos.
The bike was built around a very interesting thought process. I will be very anxious to read his review if desires to share with the rest of the board… To be honest, quit a bit of knowledge was forged into the production of this bike…
Share all your knowledge about the project.
How do you know that?
Thanks, Marcos.
I couldn’t do the story justice. I’d honestly wait on a professional write-up and I’m definitely not the right guy to do so. Someone like Dan could give a more insightful view into this machine.
I do know the bike has been in the works for over 2 years. The fella’s at Aegis wanted to create something special…and they did just that.
The guys in Maine are super. The really put there minds and experience together to create the bike. If you wanted a bit more data, I’m willing to bet they’d be more than happy to chat with you for as long as you had questions to ask. Very approachable and easy going folks.
It’s funny to me when people talk about yaw angles, drag coefficient, cda data, yadda yadda yadda with regards to just the frame alone. It makes no sense when the rider isn’t on the bike. From what I’ve gathered, the ZAERO was built around the athlete’s postion relative to “long course racing”, (i.e. - Ironman)…and how it could improve performance. While I’m sure Aerodynamics played a huge factor in the produciton of the bike…I seriously doubt that was the only thing considered.
It’s funny someone pointed out aerodynamics! On first look…the bike seems to be extremely aerodynamic. Oval A900 JetStream Fork to start Horrizontal dropouts to get the wheel as close to the seattube as possible Shorter Chain stays to increase power transfer Aero Seattube Aero Head Tube tied in with the top tube Internal cable routing…with the brake housing all the way through the top tube
I’m not quite sure what else someone’s looking for? Last time I checked, one’s bicycle efficiency and power are not determined at the frame level. While I will agree that the frame does make up some level of aerodynamics…unless you shopping apples and oranges (round tube aluminum vs. aero carbon) there’s very little difference. Quality, components, position, wheel choice, tire choice, saddle choice, bottom bracket size, flexing properties (loss of power) are things someone should be concerned with…
The QR has been windtunnel tested. The results are not public. The data for the test doesn’t mean anything in and of itself in that you can’t compare run to run n different tunnels. Cervelo has no data published for their frames. Nor Trek. But all the frames I just mentioned have CAD on the frames and have been tunnel tested. That is a fundamental difference between those frames and the Aegis frames. The margin of difference between aero frames is not enormous, but it is enough to make a difference in real world racing. Position is, of course, more important. I have no issues with Aegis, other than the issues I’d have with any company claiming to make the “fastest, most comfortable tribike” with nothing to back it up. My issues in the past were with those claiming that the T2 was an equal bike to the P3/P3C…
The maker of every product is going to claim theirs is better in a way that they think it is going to sell. In the case of tri bikes, aero light comfy etc. Read any bike makers page and you’ll find claims that someone can dispute. Kinda picking at straws. We will have to wait for some objective people to get hold of the bikes and try them out. As for the “fastest, most comfortable bike” right now it could be based on what they think and it would not be wrong. Unless they are comparing it directly to another bike they dont have to back it up with fact, that be the joy competitive advertising and marketing.
Not defending them, just saying they are not saying anything other people dont say in other words about their products. I have heard many people claim that bike A is better than bike B, and i always think, based on what?
On a total other note, I will speak for Aegis’s customer service. I broke a bike over a year ago and was dealing Pete while his nephew was in the last few weeks of his life. Pete was still calling me from his cell phone helping me resolve the issue about 8 weeks out of IMLP. That bought a lot of loyalty from me. I may be looking for a new frame in the new year, and this will be on the list. But at then end of the day fit and cost will be the deciding factor no matter what anyone says about ho fantastic their bikes are.