UCI approve disc & looking at weight limit

[NYCPrynne]

http://road.cc/content/news/146616-disc-brakes-be-permitted-peloton-2017

have not seen this anywhere else though.

[ITTY]

This is pretty cool. Maybe it will lead to the development of lighter disc brakes. Nice to hear they are thinking about the weight limit and tube shape rules too.

[cyclenutnz]

I'd actually rather they didn't change 3:1. It has taken nearly 20 years to get to a consistent application of the rule and for a decent range of compliant equipment to be available. Even then there aren't many good aerobars. Changing the rules just gives an advantage to the brands who can afford to cut new moulds for new shapes straight away and the consumers who can afford to be early adopters. It's clear that the changes are being pushed by big brands that are struggling to maintain sales (let alone grow) in the road market and want some "innovations" to peddle.

Position rules definitely need to change to be fairer (though fine for me now - I'm over 190cm). Weight limit doesn't matter - most race bikes aren't built to the current minimum.

[tharmor]

Never thought they'd actually do it. Wow

[BdaGhisallo]

So will it be all or nothing, or will some continue on rim brakes?

[ITTY]

most race bikes aren't built to the current minimum.

My race bike is about 6.25 kg. It is fairly easy to achieve without using super exotic parts and I'm sure the pros would race lighter if they could.

[jeffy]

what are the real world implications of the 3:1 rule change?

[jimwhimpey]

what are the real world implications of the 3:1 rule change?

Monstrosities like the triathlon shiv being raced in TTs.

[deek]

So will it be all or nothing, or will some continue on rim brakes?

Discs are legal in cross and people still use cantis. Since there's more money in road racing, sponsors will likely push their athletes harder to use whatever new disc brake frames come out. We'll see. Disc brakes are certain to be heavier and if they lower the weight limit as well, it might make it interesting.

what are the real world implications of the 3:1 rule change?

Some new TT bikes are already eschewing the 3:1 rule. Take a look at the Specialized Shiv Tri and the Felt IA.

[Grill]

what are the real world implications of the 3:1 rule change?

Some new TT bikes are already eschewing the 3:1 rule. Take a look at the Specialized Shiv Tri and the Felt IA.

No they aren't. Those are both tri-specific bikes which don't have to adhere to UCI regs. The Shiv TT and Felt DA still exist for a reason...

[deek]

Huh? How are they not breaking the 3:1 rule?

[cyclenutnz]

My race bike is about 6.25 kg. It is fairly easy to achieve without using super exotic parts and I'm sure the pros would race lighter if they could.

It's still not that common for pro bikes to be below 7. Saddles chosen for comfort, bars and wheels for reliability. Stiffened up frames (or Sarto frames with bog to make them look like the sponsors product) - lots of reasons that a new weight limit will only really affect the bikes of top riders in mountain stages.

You wouldn't see Shiv Tri raced in TTs - too tall for a good TT position. Plus they're really slow in TT conditions, only perform well when it's very windy with a slow rider.

[Valbrona]

The UCI have not approved the use of discs at all.

road.cc is a Mickey-Mouse publication that publishes speculation.

It is speculated that road discs will be approved for the 2016 season.

[BeeSeeBee]

what are the real world implications of the 3:1 rule change?

I think it's pretty hard to say. Even when throwing the UCI rules to the wind, the frames that have come out aren't dramatically faster. The Felt IA is slower than the P5 (P5-6 I think, though the P5-3 was only 1-2W slower) at narrow yaw angles and only pulls ahead >7.5° (with or without rider on I'm not sure, the P5 supposedly has some shielding effects to reduce rider drag as well). Longer chord lengths seem to be more beneficial at higher (>10°) yaw angles, which we typically spend less time in. It seems like we've started to really hit an aero plateau, where everything is pretty damn fast, and you're talking about only giving up a couple of watts between different bikes. The new S5 frameset alone (barring the additions of the special bar, and now stock aero wheels) is supposedly basically the same as the old S5. The New P3 is only a couple of watts slower than the P5 despite not having as much aero trickery going on. It's really a nice time to be looking at bikes because everything is only incrementally better, and every company is putting out some solid kit.

[ms6073]

Huh? How are they not breaking the 3:1 rule?

Only bikes used in events that fall under the UCI regulations have to meet the UCI 3:1 rule. Except for certain pro events, the majority of triathlons do not fall under the UCI regulations.

road.cc is a Mickey-Mouse publication that publishes speculation.

Was that meant to be in a colored font to denote humor or sarcasm?