Don't want to hijack the thread but as we're mentioned here I want to take the opportunity to dispel a few myths.
As much as we admire the RCa and consider it to be a benchmark product, they do not have access to any carbon prepreg or resin systems we don't - as a matter of fact I'd wager it's the other way around.
As far as aerodynamics go, CFD software with over 100 million nodes is now becoming available to a wider audience, the trick is what you do with it..
Our aero work is done at Lotus F1 by aerodynamicist Nick Hales. We feel their knowledge and resources measure up to most cycling companies.
Lastly on monocoques versus tube to tube: please note that neither the RCa nor the Trek nor Cannondale are true monocoques.
They are 'multi-coques' where the main frame is assembled from different pieces and glued into a separate bb piece.
Our bike however is a monocoque where the entire main triangle, along with bb & headtube including bearing races, is molded in one piece with continuous fibers throughout.
Being bespoke, we also don't need to play averages when calculating the layup for the rider.
I would disagree with you suggesting to have access to more advanced composites than Criterion Composites. At best the composites you have access to are on the same level. Considering how much strength testing big companies do, how does the A2J compare?
As with regards to aerodynamics, bike specific experience has many perks as there are tricks that are learned over the years. With bike specific code and hundreds of wind tunnel tests and refined testing procedure, you get direct data correlation to other bikes made and to the CFD model. Not just with the bike, but with rider, wheels, components, and cables. Everything must be simulated as a system accurately, and at yaw. It's obviously not about the processing power anymore, the correlation (to real world data collection, and to tunnel) is everything, and that is still something that F1 teams have trouble with. This is a different Reynold's number than F1. Cervelo has pushed longer than most in the aero bike game, and independent tests have shone that their aero bikes do deliver (and often more than other companies).
You make an AMAZING product which is fully custom and thus has potential to go beyond a "production R&D prototype" RCA which is made to trickle the tech down to the other bikes in the range. If the RCA was fully custom, I reckon they could get the weight for some people under 600 grams. But then I'm not sure it would meet Cervelo's strength testing