Back by popular demand, the general all-things Road forum!
Moderator: robbosmans
-
Tumppi
- Posts: 345
- Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2004 9:41 am
- Location: FINLAND
-
Contact:
by Tumppi on Mon Jun 04, 2012 9:21 pm
Fourthbook wrote:Seems like a brake mounted under the BB would be a nightmare in sloppy conditions. Won't it pick up more mud, etc. there? I also wonder how the lack of a brake bridge between the rear seat stays affects frame rigidity, especially when sprinting - flexing the frame from side to side.
+1 on the ugly headtube shape...
I agree the chainstay mounted brake for mud picker, but I can see no difference in rigidity cause seatstays are already very thin. Chainstays are more rigid and these direct mount brakes need VERY rigid construction because they push chainstays outward. When I have these type of brakes in my MTB about 25 years ago, we have to put U shape stiffener (booster) to prevent this (flexing) problem...
-
airwise
- Posts: 1018
- Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2010 8:31 pm
by airwise on Mon Jun 04, 2012 9:27 pm
Mountain Bike manufacturers worked out that was a stupid idea decades ago.
Change for change's sake is such a waste of human endeavor.
Looking forward to someone attacking Schleck when he get's a piece of debris stuck in there.
-
Calnago
- In Memoriam
- Posts: 8612
- Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 9:14 pm
by Calnago on Mon Jun 04, 2012 10:17 pm
djwalker wrote:What a horrible place to put the brake- directly in the path of all the garbage kicked up by the front wheel. This would really suck in bad weather. And accessibility for maintenance is horrible.
+1!
-
strobbekoen
- Posts: 4426
- Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 6:24 pm
- Location: BELGIUM
by strobbekoen on Mon Jun 04, 2012 10:43 pm
Looks neat when spic & span clean but seriously, it's a nightmare for in-race conditions. A racer himself or a mechanic in the car should always be able to adjust the brake while riding, especially the rear one. Okay, it could be done, risking losing a couple fingers trying.. This stuff is getting to the point of ridiculous for bikes designed for road racing (non TT).
The bike looks good though. ha.
-
roca rule
- Posts: 672
- Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 2:23 am
- Location: so. cal.
by roca rule on Tue Jun 05, 2012 12:05 am
so we got
ugly head tube
non ideal location for brakes
cable routing
and above all it is a trek.
just kidding i am sure trek might make some other changes before it releases to the general public.
-
Tinea Pedis
- Posts: 8614
- Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 6:08 am
-
Contact:
by Tinea Pedis on Tue Jun 05, 2012 3:49 am
strobbekoen wrote:Okay, it could be done, risking losing a couple fingers trying..
Part of me hopes we see it during the Dauphine or the Tour...
strobbekoen wrote:The bike looks good though. ha.
Grudgingly have to agree
And Carey, not a single credit to WW for the heads up?
-
elviento
- Posts: 1199
- Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2005 7:09 pm
- Location: In the industry
-
Contact:
by elviento on Tue Jun 05, 2012 4:45 am
I agree the HT/fork junction is ugly, but I'm sure the numbers will shine.
The typical "flow" from HT to fork results in a "disjointed" fork from steerer to the crown, and uneven stiffness numbers in the steerer and the crown.
Storck said "f**k that". Now so does Trek. I say kudos for the courage.
jmilliron wrote:Frame looks cool. Seat stays without the brake bridge look interesting. Wonder if that changes ride quality and power transfer?
Dislike the flow from the HT to the fork though. Disjointed.
-
theremery
- Posts: 2658
- Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2005 10:56 am
- Location: New Zealand
by theremery on Tue Jun 05, 2012 8:41 am
Perhaps with the DI2 battery down there already (splitting the air from the frame already) it became the best place to put it (aerodynamically). It looks nice
Updated: Racing again! Thought this was unlikely! Eventually, I may even have a decent race!
Edit: 2015: darn near won the best South Island series (got second in age
-group)..woo hoo Racy Theremery is back!!
-
VNTech
- Posts: 195
- Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2011 8:08 pm
by VNTech on Tue Jun 05, 2012 8:58 am
Tinea Pedis wrote:Grudgingly have to agree
And Carey, not a single credit to WW for the heads up?
Ha, no, sorry, this was on my list long before WW brought it up. It's been on the UCI list since April. But WW was still the first I saw it mentioned anywhere else
VeloNews Magazine/VeloNews.com tech
-
haton3
- Posts: 1
- Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2012 9:37 am
by haton3 on Tue Jun 05, 2012 9:48 am
From a practical point of view, and since most of us can't afford a Domane for the classics/crappy conditions & the new Madone for fine days, putting the rear brake underneath the BB isn't exactly the greatest move for the reasons highlighted above. It'll also lead to rapid wear of the pads.
Can you imagine us riding in the deep winter, or doing the Tour of Flanders / Paris-Roubaix sportives on the new Madone?! Ha.
I'm keen to know if this will be an addition to their new ''Aero'' line in the same way as Specalized's Venge/SL4, while still retaining the 6.9 SSL?
-
ms6073
- Posts: 4288
- Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2004 8:24 pm
- Location: Houston, Texas
by ms6073 on Tue Jun 05, 2012 5:51 pm
Tinea Pedis wrote:strobbekoen wrote:Okay, it could be done, risking losing a couple fingers trying..
Part of me hopes we see it during the Dauphine or the Tour...
While I agree that road debris may be an issue, for brake adjustments, from this
image I got the impression that there is an inline cable adjuster on the brake cable up front thus no need for the rider to hang onto the team car while mecahnic adjusts the brakes.
- Michael
"People should stop expecting normal from me... seriously, we all know it's never going to happen"