Buddy of mine has started his own gig after a long stint with a major carbon manufacture. What are y’alls thoughts?
http://www.warp9bikes.com/site/index.php?dispatch=categories.view&category_id=41
I dont know. It is a lot of green to spend on a frame if it was not made with testing. From what I can see of the frame and read, it does not provide anything that make it a real stand-out. I think that there are some very simple things that could be incoorportated into a frame to add real value which is currently lacking from many of todays offerings. If you were able to combine these, then you may have something. Im not trying to be a kill-joy; just saying that the current offerings, and the pricepoint is going to make it a hard sell in my very humble opinion.
Stephen J
I think it ‘looks’ pretty nice, but $2,600 is a lot of cash.
Did you even look at the pictures and read what it says?
“This is the ultimate Time Trial Bike. In development for the past 20 months, this next generation frame incorporates slick features such as a hidden rear brake, top-tube routed control cables, horizontal dropouts and wind tunnel tuned aerodynamics.”
This has the advancements from the new trek, specialized, P4, etc. but does it in a modular, non-integrated way that doesn’t tied you to a custom this or a custom that. Use your own rear brake under the BB, use any stem and fork - but still make it aero. This is almost exactly what I would design if I had the money to do so (and the need to meet UCI regs).
Chris
Is there a pic of the frame built up? It says that the frame has a hidden rear brake but it looks like there’s a mount where the brake would normally go. Just curious.
Yes, I read it, and yes it incorporates all these; but this is not the same as saying it works the same way. I could do all this (and have…so I have some hopes that it does translate) as ‘add ons’; but this does not mean that it will work like the thing I took the idea from. All I am saying is that there are a lot of offerings these days, and just because something is ‘in development’ for that long does not mean that it is properly engineered, or even works. Now dont get me wrong…Im not saying that it doesnt either. Im just saying that if I had a limited amount of cash to spend, the current explanation/marketing of this frame is not enough to convice me that it is worth that much.
Stephen J
complete bike would be nice to see
.
Right, you could just buy a felt and be done with it.
Chris
If I were an independent frame maker like this guy, I would pay somebody with a known name, to devise a test scheme to compare it to the top two or three best-selling or better know aero frames. If I was testing right now I would pick the P3, Trek TTX and Felt Da and put them up against your self-made frame. Sure, some people will say it is suspect, but if the numbers for the well-known frames are in the ballpark with other manufacturers tests then it would go a long way to convince some people.
Or alternatively, I’d just ask Tom A. what frame size he uses and send him four identically built bikes that he could swap out his Quarq PM on and ride. 
I’d buy a frame if he said it was fast(er).
The bigger problem is that the price is the same as a full P2C bike. Only three or four bikes are faster than a P2C and none of them are cheaper. A lot of more expensive bikes are slower. If you are offering up a frame at that cost you better prove to me it is fast.
Chad
Chad
I’m personally turned off by the single low-quality picture of the frame.
I believe the pricepoint may be too ambitious given the presence of the Felt B16 and Cervelo P2.
Also, it’s directly competing with a PlanetX frame but at about twice the price.
I honestly like it- I would like to support entrepreneurs and have a unique bike- just not with that poor presentation or at that price point.
True, very true; but I would still foolishly try to make it faster.
I think it’s a prototype. Look at the presentation of a bike they currently sell. I think when it’s ready they will present it properly. I think they are showing “spy” shots. Burt and I never even talked about the frame and I didn’t know the price. Just wanted first impressions after seeing it when I looked at his site. He is a very smart guy and anything I’ve ever seen him do was no compromise stuff and he’s done a lot in many sports.
I’m personally turned off by the single low-quality picture of the frame.
I believe the pricepoint may be too ambitious given the presence of the Felt B16 and Cervelo P2.
Also, it’s directly competing with a PlanetX frame but at about twice the price.
I honestly like it- I would like to support entrepreneurs and have a unique bike- just not with that poor presentation or at that price point.
I’d just ask Tom A. what frame size he uses and send him four identically built bikes that he could swap out his Quarq PM on and ride. I’d buy a frame if he said it was fast(er).
So what am I - chopped liver? 
(http://home.earthlink.net/~acoggan/whichisfasterthecervelop2torthejavelinarcole/)
What are y’alls thoughts?
http://www.warp9bikes.com/...w&category_id=41
I’d like it better if it were UCI legal so I could use it.
Other than that, my only question is, what fork was used to develop/test it? Based on the available data on various bikes currently on the market, I would say that it is important that the fork and frame be properly ‘mated’ to each other to minimize aerodynamic drag.
I have no problem with “trying to make it faster”, as long as the work actually gets done instead of just talking and complaining.
My attempts are no different than any of the other obsessed aeroweenies on this board except that I actually fabricate parts and attach them to my bike instead of taking about it.
Chris
Or alternatively, I’d just ask Tom A. what frame size he uses and send him four identically built bikes that he could swap out his Quarq PM on and ride. I’d buy a frame if he said it was fast(er).
I like that idea
My only stipulation would be that I get to keep the fastest one
Just looks like a generic Chinese TT frame to me, bought at minimum cost and then rebranded by the good folks at Warp 9. Nothing wrong with that, of course, but a $2000 mark up seems a bit stiff.
Honestly. Does noone else think that ‘marketing’ a $2600 frame with a photo that looks like my 3-year old took it is a bit fishy?
And where are the ‘results’ of the extensive 20 month wind tunnel testing etc etc?
I’d be delighted to be proved wrong, of course.
Good point. The Ascent is presented very well. I also really like the sketch of the TT bike shown on the products page.
My first impression of the bike itself is that it has a lot of excellent features and appears to be unique but is still unproven in my mind. I like the top tube cable entry and extensive covering of the rear wheel.
Please direct me to the Chinese manufacture that makes this frame Or something close for $600 and I will buy 100 of them tomorrow slap RENN on it and sell it for $900. Kidding of course if my friend ever reads this.
The Ascent is presented very well. I also really like the sketch of the TT bike shown on the products page.
Warp9 also makes a well-regarded track fork, which is no mean feat.