New Aero 2016

[toolonglegs]

[singlespeedscott]

Thanks Ian.

50sec over 40km, pfft. It reconfirms why I don't waste my money on modern carbon [emoji1]

[toolonglegs]

Ok that is with the same wheels on both bikes. I would say with a modern groupset on the steel frame that would be halved again.
Anyway when it comes down to it the rider is the aero brick... Not the bike.

[g-boaf]

http://www.bikeradar.com/us/road/news/a ... 016-44623/

Officially released, and actually not that bad looking. Well at least all things being relative.. it is still a Trek

Yeah, quite like it. And what do you mean about "Still a Trek"!

[TMjpn]

Yeah, quite like it. And what do you mean about "Still a Trek"!

Can't quite put my finger on what it is about Trekkies..

I just can't connect with the brand in spite of a pro team and even the Cancellara factor.. maybe its the styling.

Maybe its because I'm more of a Cannondale guy

Or maybe it because most of the folk I notice riding the latest madone's around cancel out the aero benefits with their baggy loose fit tops and helmet visors

I will admit the gloss black on matte black version of the new Madone is Hot.



Although that might be because you can hardly see the branding!


Don't mind me all the same.. Not ashamed to admit the next bike I'm eyeing off is a Merida Reacto.

[g-boaf]

I have only an older Madone 4.5 (well before they were aero machines).

That black one looks good, but heavens, no more matte finish bikes - they are a nightmare to keep clean. Gloss finish and metallic paint for me thanks.

Edit: eh... Maybe forget about that.. Just saw the price!

[mikesbytes]

I like the tidy look of no visible cables on the trek. Wonder what approach they used to get them past the steerer tube?

Perhaps its in 2 parts, one section for the handlebars to clamp onto and then a bolt (for want of better words) to the second section, which goes to the forks. That would allow a space for the cables to go past without interfering with turning

[singlespeedscott]

I like the tidy look of no visible cables on the trek. Wonder what approach they used to get them past the steerer tube?

Perhaps its in 2 parts, one section for the handlebars to clamp onto and then a bolt (for want of better words) to the second section, which goes to the forks. That would allow a space for the cables to go past without interfering with turning

Those hidden cables are all good if you run electronic/wireless shifters and hydraulic brakes but for any system that uses wires it's just going to be a mechanics nightmare and be detrimental to performance

[lock_]

^ This. Build the bike once so it fits [1] and never have to change a cable because there aren't any.

I was secretly hoping in the leadup to the Venge unveil that the brakes would be hydraulic, and that they'd teamed up with SRAM to justify the existence of my hydro rim brakes.

[1]: Specialized have put together quite a fancy fit tool with the intention that your bike gets setup for you from the beginning. Correct bar width/stem length/stack height. It does make me wonder though, what about the bikes built up for show in the shop? Fair bit of work involved to drop the bars down 5mm, and impossible to raise them 5mm! At least the Trek spacers can be slipped on without recabling (they are split).

[TMjpn]

I like the tidy look of no visible cables on the trek. Wonder what approach they used to get them past the steerer tube?

From what I've read they use a proprietary spacer and steerer tube system that pairs with the model specific aero bar. Cables run through the bar and stem and then along a squared off steerer tube through the top headset bearing and thus into the head tube and onto everywhere else from there. Theres a section in the downtube which can be removed for mechanic access to guide the cables and mount the Di2 battery. The front brake is a bespoke direct mount with centre pull, similar to the rear.

I'd imagine some of those cables would have some on-the-limit bends, like many of the bikes these aero set-ups

[Xplora]

Scott, 50 seconds over 40kms is about 0.75kmh average for nothing. It's a huge difference but I can accept that speed isn't everything.

I am keen. Big dollars tho.

[toolonglegs]

Scott, 50 seconds over 40kms is about 0.75kmh average for nothing. It's a huge difference but I can accept that speed isn't everything.

I am keen. Big dollars tho.

I think the quote was 27 secs for 40 kms at an average of 45 kmph... or 6w's.

[singlespeedscott]

Scott, 50 seconds over 40kms is about 0.75kmh average for nothing. It's a huge difference but I can accept that speed isn't everything.

I am keen. Big dollars tho.

Thats assuming everything else is right. It's not taking into account fitness, bike position, tyre pressure, climate etc. To many variables for me to be convinced that it will actually save me that much time in the real world..

[Xplora]

I think you missed interpret that statement. It doesn't matter if anythingis right. If all else is equal, 0.75kmh faster. If you got in the drops all day you might get an extra 1kmh... But thats hard work. The only cost for Aero speed is your wallet, and potentially weight if you climb a lot.

[queequeg]

I get the feeling they have decided that the steel tube was dead quite a while back and stopped testing. Wind tunnels are expensive.

They can borrow my Hillbrick

[singlespeedscott]

I think you missed interpret that statement. It doesn't matter if anythingis right. If all else is equal, 0.75kmh faster. If you got in the drops all day you might get an extra 1kmh... But thats hard work. The only cost for Aero speed is your wallet, and potentially weight if you climb a lot.

On the crappy coarse chip and dirt roads I ride I am pretty certain I wouldn't feel like i am riding 0.75kmhr faster.

Dont get me worng I admire the engineering goals and outcomes but I just dont see where the money has gone when you compared it to something like a 1000cc superbike.

I think they are designed more for the innercity posser or pro sponsered racer than the every day cyclist.

[mikesbytes]

Your paying for the research and technology that went into it, if unit sales were the same as a superbike the price would be more competitive.

You also need to be wary of adding up the improved performances. If x gives you 20 seconds, Y gives you 35 seconds and z gives you 15 seconds the total improvement is less than 70 seconds even though each of the individual improvements is genuine.

My problem is the nut behind the handlebars, I'm about 90 seconds off NSW Masters Bronze medal over 25k and no improvement in equipment is going to bridge that gap. If you can't afford the shiny new bike, then look for some cheaper improvements related to your torso;
1. Hair, have a look at Trek's aero tests on legs, arms and face. Two of them showed decent improvements and the third one had no benefit
2. Position. You body has much greater wind resistance that the bike
3. Training. Tends to help but your coffee bill will go up

Now if I was 15 seconds off that medal my pockets might become a bit deeper

[Xplora]

The reality I see riding and racing is that a 2w/hour saving over 4 or 5 elements is effectively ruining your race. Your bell lap surge increases your wind resistance as you are faster, it is robbing you of 2 months hard training. There are limits of course. Big ones. You still have to train. Aero won't fix your problems. But for your average C grader it will be the difference between podium and packfill.

The only time extra wind resistance is good is training. But the avoidance of aero bikes because it doesn't make much difference? Just go with a single speed then. Gears don't make much difference

[singlespeedscott]

Strangely on rolling terrain I'm faster on the fixed gear than with gears

[toolonglegs]

Well if 6w per hour for your av C grader was going to make a difference he/she would only achieve that benefit if they were off the front solo.... And they better be racing in a skin suit and aero road helmet.
I wouldn't say no to one... But it is out of reach for me. What it will mean is when Beppu gets his new team bike all my local KOM's will sail even further into the distance

[Xplora]

That's the thing.... I already use a skinsuit and an Aero helmet... I am in favour of any Aero gain possible while maintaining some safety and practicality. Deep wheels are an issue... And you will achieve some benefit as a sprinter.

Just to clear, this is classic cognitive dissonance in action. The Aero bike is faster. The only negatives are weight past 8 degree hills and stiffness which some can't handle. also looks. If you are young and healthy and dont race hills, Aero bikes are better.

[toolonglegs]

No doubt!... And if you are going to race it you need to be able to afford to crash it
I like the front photo on the cyclingtips article.... Funny how out of place the Scott now looks with cables out in the open.

[mikesbytes]

Well said, if you can't afford to replace it, then perhaps you shouldn't buy it. And now that there's one out there with the cables concealed the competitors will need need to follow, just like 11 speed

[donncha]

S5 in faster again and you can buy one for less than $5K.
You don't need to spend 10K+

[Xplora]

2016 Madone showed better aero under higher yaw than the S5. But less under sub 5 degree angles.