So, yeah, the F1 is lighter, but according to cyclingnews it is too light and they have to add chain to the seatpost. Why not just use the AR and do away with added chain? Since the AR has an aero advantage and no weight penalty I don’t see the value of the F1 for them? Ride quality? VDV looks to be riding 808’s (or was it 404’s) so it seems he thinks aerodynamics is of some importance.
My guess is that big reason is that the bikes don’t fit the same and likely don’t handle the same. The F1 has fantastic geometry, so maybe the riders were loathe to give that up. How a bike handles is massively important. The fit they could probably make work, but if you are comfortable with the geometry of a given bike, it’s not clear that you’d want to go to a different bike for aero.
I suppose that makes sense except if you read the marketing material from Felt, it says they designed this bike in large part based on demands/requests from the team. It will be interesting to see if they adopt it for some of the classics and some flatter sections of the grand tours. Aero bikes from Cervelo, Ridley and now Felt seem to be the hot, new sexy commodity but I really wonder if saving less than one minute for an hour ride is a big selling point for amatures?
Aero bikes from Cervelo, Ridley and now Felt seem to be the hot, new sexy commodity but I really wonder if saving less than one minute for an hour ride is a big selling point for amatures?
The time savings are absolutely a selling point. Let’s face it, competing amateurs (be it du/tri or pure cyclists) have one mission: get on the bike as soon as possible and get off the bike as soon as possible. The reigning mentality is that a slick new frame will shave a minute off my 20 mile ride. That’s not much, but if I upgrade my component group, swap out my seatpost, go carbon on the cockpit, and splurge for aero rims, then I’ll shave off at least 5 minutes on that same 20 mile ride. I’ve heard that exact logic on many, many occasions. Two problems: (1) most folks seem to think that these individual savings are cumulative (which they’re not), and (2) most folks assume that they will achieve the maximum savings advertised by the manufacturer.