…will be introduced at Interbike…
Pics or it doesn’t exist.
Rules are rules.
i agree and apologize…just a prediction i am almost certain will come true…maybe gerard can post one:)
.
Gerard already said “NO!”.
Now go to your room
.
i agree and apologize…just a prediction i am almost certain will come true…maybe gerard can post one:)
Maybe a “?” following your subject line would make it less misleading.
it’s going to happen…
it’s going to happen…
just a prediction i am almost certain will come true
OK… so which is it?
…either way, in a week or so we’ll all know…
…either way, in a week or so we’ll all know…
No answer huh? Are you in politics by any chance 
…i’ll say yes…
now, if only gerard would chime in:)
Gerard can’t talk, right now he’s busy designing a titanium mountain bike.
The Scott Plasma looks like a P2C if you ask me. Except that Gerard would never have made it that wide.
Honestly tho. I’d love for the P2C to be available but I think it would be a bit of a waste. I think the P2K is an often overlooked bike. It’s a gnats cock away from a P3 at a much improved price.
A P2C would be a silly waste of time for Cervelo. If you’re gonna go to the trouble of developing a carbon bike, then do the P3C like Cervelo did. The P2C becomes redundant really, and would likely simply delay the production of the P3C and just piss people off.
If anything, I think the P2K should be upgraded to the P2.5K and have a thicker seat tube (like the down tube). Now that the deeper seat post from the P3C is available, add that and have the aero set stays from the P3 added as well. Throw in an elliptical front end to the head tube (go back to a non-integrated headset with 1" steerer, while you’re at it) and Voila!! P2.5K Then maybe drop the P2K and the P3 altogether and just have a P2.5K and P3C as your choices for Tri Bikes.
That’s gotta be good for ya!
No P3 SL??? Bite your tongue… Some of us aren’t total carbon freaks, and would rather have that, than the P3C. But, an updated P2 SL(or a P2.1 SL, why jump to 2.5?)would be nice for the price point, but only if it kept the same relative pricing. Not much to improve except maybe some reinforcement around the bottom bracket to stiffen it a bit. Make too many changes and it will be the same price as the P3 SL.
P2.5, so it fits in with the old? R2.5 nomenclature, plus it would be stealing some stuff from the P3 (and P3C, ie seatpost) so 2.5 seemed like a good number.
2.1 sounds to much like Windows 3.1 (was there ever a 3.2, or 3.5???) so 2.5 was my choice. It’s not like Gerard would do it, so no real use us discussing the point.
Here is the background on the R2.5 name by the way: http://forum.slowtwitch.com/gforum.cgi?post=362960;search_string=It%20was%20the%20first%20frames%20that%20was%20(in%20part)%20developed%20with%20CSC's%20and%20Riis'%20feedback%20;#362960
"It was the first frames that was (in part) developed with CSC’s and Riis’ feedback (of course we had started development a few years earlier). We wanted to somehow acknowledge that, but without naming it after CSC or Riis. So we took the ii as a Roman numeral for 2, and an S is basically the same shape as a 5, so that it spells R2.5 or RII5. The period (which we call a “silent dot”, whatever that means) is just to make sure people wouldn’t say R twenty-five.
No P3 SL??? Bite your tongue… Some of us aren’t total carbon freaks, and would rather have that, than the P3C. But, an updated P2 SL(or a P2.1 SL, why jump to 2.5?)would be nice for the price point, but only if it kept the same relative pricing. Not much to improve except maybe some reinforcement around the bottom bracket to stiffen it a bit. Make too many changes and it will be the same price as the P3 SL.
Well, the 2006 P2 SL has exactly that. We didn’t change the name, but we did change the tubing. The seattube is reinforced at the bb to increase the bb stiffness (even though the P2 SL already had above average bb stiffness) and it is now pretty close to the P3 bb in that regard. As for a P2 Carbon, it’s an interesting idea. Somebody’s got to show all these companies how to properly turn a P2 into Carbon.
“As for a P2 Carbon, it’s an interesting idea. Somebody’s got to show all these companies how to properly turn a P2 into Carbon.”
Dear God that’s a loaded answer.
But a good one nonetheless. Wish I was going to Interbike…
Well Gerard,
It appears I’m not as dumb as I look…
Regards,
Aerosapien