Why couldn’t they make the frame look as clean as the proto’s where it appears they altered the frame instead of using a cheap rubber cable cover…
This looks so much cleaner…
http://miletichphotography.zenfolio.com/img/v1/p592088849-3.jpg
I hadn’t noticed the difference between proto and production. I think I like the proto more, I don’t like how there is still some cables sticking out of the nine series and the clamp on bars are kinda odd. Lieto’s bike last years at Kona just looks soooo much cleaner than the high end 9 now. Makes my want this bike just a little bit less…only a little though!
Why couldn’t they make the frame look as clean as the proto’s where it appears they altered the frame instead of using a cheap rubber cable cover…
This looks so much cleaner…
Just a WAG that the scoop as part of the top tube rules afoul of the 160mm UCI rule.
Also could make servicing the cables a bit more difficult.
Cleaner, yes. More expensive, absolutely. They need some way to be able to raise and lower the front end a reasonable amount, or each one would have to be custom. Custom CF work is VERY expensive.
Chris
Aerobars too- the aerobars on the bike in the picture are much cleaner than the ones that come with the speed concept.
I am let down.
I personally like the new aero bars. The value of being able to tweak your position is critical…and I believe Trek has done an excellent job of balancing aesthetics with function. I’ve already voted with my money on this one… Maybe we should start a “SC Rollcall” thread…
X2 on the aero bars. I can fit the small easily due to the adjustability of the bars. I just ordered mine today. ETD 50-75 days.
Wait until you see the bars in person – I’ll bet you change your mind. They’re gorgeous. As far as the cable cover goes, I’m not sure exactly why they switched it, but it does look easier to service this way. Plus the cables have a little more give with a rubber cover as opposed to CF. Not sure if that’s important, but just something I noticed.
Would you say as nice as the bars on the prototype above?
Also, know anything about sizing? Trek suggests a size up from their TTX Equinox- hard to figure all the variables from their sizing chart.
Don’t just go up a size from your ttx blindly. Rather, get a good bike fit, and plug your stack and reach into that size chart. It’s pretty straightforward. Trek just advises that you might need a larger size, so be prepared to consider it. Don’t assume your current size is correct.
As to the bars, yes, I think the Speed Concept bar is better than the team bar. But to really make it sexy, you have to take a little care. Read below.
First of all, the Speed Concept bar is something else. It is flat along it’s entire surface, with no round bar bulge where standard bars would attach. Like a Ventus, but it still clamps to a stem unit which can be changed out for one of six stems. It has tons of adjustment, and can accept any standard extensions. That last part is important, because people should use whatever extension they like best. I for one will be swapping out the stock bars for some trusty s bends.
Now, what makes the team bars so sexy is how the cables NEVER make an appearance. They stay internal throughout. The Speed Concept bars have cable ports on the flat part of the bar, and your cables have to exit your extensions and then re enter at the bar.
If you run your extensions without spacers, then your extensions will be very low, close to those ports, and your cables will be virtually invisible. However, if you run a lot of spacers, then you will see a little more cable right there.
So, if the ultra clean look of the prototypes is a priority for you (and I’ll admit, I am in this boar) then you’ll want to pick the stem that lets you run your extensions with the fewest spacers possible. That’s how Chris Lieto had his bike set up for the ToC TT, and I’ll post pics of that later.
Sweet- thanks. Sounds like you could pick either size and get the right stem to get the right stack/reach as well.
I seem to be in between small and medium.
Bingo. That’s exactly what I plan to do. I mean, what could be sexier than this setup? And yes, this is the PRODUCTION bar!
Watch the slowtwitch.com front page for a full gallery with more Speed Concept pics:
http://i600.photobucket.com/albums/tt85/salazarphoto/Trek_Speed_Concept_03.jpg
http://i600.photobucket.com/albums/tt85/salazarphoto/Trek_Speed_Concept_08.jpg
Bingo. That’s exactly what I plan to do. I mean, what could be sexier than this setup? And yes, this is the PRODUCTION bar!
Watch the slowtwitch.com front page for a full gallery with more Speed Concept pics:
The bar looks great. Sadly I’ll be running quite alot of spacers so there will be more exposed cable.
Why? There are three different stems, so unless you’re on an XL frame, with the tallest stem, there’s probably a way you can run fewer spacers.
Base bar is a bit too high with the medium stem.
Question for Nick (or anyone who knows), do you know what the range of adjustment is for the published arm pad stack? Is the published number the lowest possible stack?
Also, what kind of range of pad widths (centre-centre) can you get with the SC?
Trek’s fit chart has the range of pad stacks for each stem. It’s the bottom portion of the graph, with the staircase bars of numbers which indicate the range of stack for each stem on each frame size.
As to pad widths, I’m not sure, but it appears you can flip how the extensions mount, and therefore go from very narrow to very wide.
Looking at the Trek size charts for a size Small, the stated arm pad stack is 610mm. Compare this to the Shiv which has a stack of 543mm. Can’t understand why there would be such a big difference. Is Trek’s published stack really as low as it will go? Is there only unward arm pad stack adjustment?
If so, does it not seem that lots of people won’t be able to get low enough on the SC?
You’re reading something wrong. For a size small, the Trek can stack anywhere from 560mm up to 675mm, depending on which stem unit you choose, and how many spacers you use. The base bar stack heights can be 515mm, 550mm, or 580mm for size Small depending on stem. Not sure where you’re getting 610.
Read it here:
http://www.trekbikes.com/pdf/2010/triathlon/speedconcept_fit_v3.pdf
Ah, I was wrongly looking at the higher limit of the pad stack. Apologies, thanks for pointing me in the right direction.
The bike is now back on my radar!