2018 CIPOLLINI RB1K The One

Discuss light weight issues concerning road bikes & parts.
User avatar
Discoverspeed
Posts: 520
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2010 10:20 am

by Discoverspeed

What matters most is the frame's stack height. For the same stack, a shorter head tube could be due to a longer fork.
Current Bikes: Storck F.3 5.5kg
Colnago Concept Art Deco CHDK 7/6.5kg
Collection: Team Ti Raleigh 753 Vintage Campy
Storck Organic Light 11.1kg
Ex: Storck F0.6 Di2 6kg, Storck F0.7IS Di2 4.8kg, Storck Aero2 7.04kg

by Weenie


User avatar
Discoverspeed
Posts: 520
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2010 10:20 am

by Discoverspeed

Love the Chrome Black finish. Always wanted something chrome in my collection but not the mirror chrome type. This is perfect.

Like the way the downtube "eats into" the front tire and the seat tube cowling over the rear tires. Super neat cabling with the R9150 - only two cables showing. Looks like a hidden Di2 EW-RS910 Junction A, presumably into the handlebar. Beautiful. Direct mount brakes front and rear.

Deviating slightly from some of the aero road frames out there, the rear seat stays attach rather high into the seat tube but is one solid carbon lump. Should be super stiff, especially for the rear brakes. Get ready for a butt hard ride together with the aero seat tube that wouldn't be flexing so much. I just wonder what is that cap covering the front of the top tube at the headset area?
Last edited by Discoverspeed on Wed Jun 14, 2017 3:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Current Bikes: Storck F.3 5.5kg
Colnago Concept Art Deco CHDK 7/6.5kg
Collection: Team Ti Raleigh 753 Vintage Campy
Storck Organic Light 11.1kg
Ex: Storck F0.6 Di2 6kg, Storck F0.7IS Di2 4.8kg, Storck Aero2 7.04kg

kode54
Posts: 1125
Joined: Tue May 23, 2006 9:39 pm

by kode54

first Cipo i would consider. i like it.
- AX Lightness Vial EVO D + DA9150 + Enve SES 3.4 carbon hubs
- Parlee Altum + DA9150 + Enve SES 4.5 carbon hubs
- Parlee ESX + DA9150 + THM SRM PM + Enve SES 6.7 CK hubs
- Independent Fabrication Ti FLW + DA9100 + Enve 3.4 CK hubs

nismosr
Posts: 1016
Joined: Mon May 05, 2008 5:15 pm

by nismosr

AJS914 wrote:
kidrob wrote:Mario Cipollini could have at least worked out a bit before showing like that


Damn, he looks like the hulk. You have to respect a cyclist that doesn't get fat after retirement.


her bicep though .. :D

User avatar
Discoverspeed
Posts: 520
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2010 10:20 am

by Discoverspeed

Image
Current Bikes: Storck F.3 5.5kg
Colnago Concept Art Deco CHDK 7/6.5kg
Collection: Team Ti Raleigh 753 Vintage Campy
Storck Organic Light 11.1kg
Ex: Storck F0.6 Di2 6kg, Storck F0.7IS Di2 4.8kg, Storck Aero2 7.04kg

User avatar
53x12
Posts: 3762
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2006 6:02 am
Location: On the bike

by 53x12

kgt wrote:RB1000 has (or had?) a shorter headtube than the bikes you just showed.


You of anyone, should know that it is stack + reach that matters for fit. Headtube doesn't matter as that can be made up +/- by fork length as already mentioned. (In addition to BB height, head tube angle...etc.)

Having a true aero frame is not mutually exclusive from getting your body low enough. As I showed above, the pros have no problem getting low enough on their team sponsored aero road frames.

Secondly, with the use of negative angled stems, there is no issue getting low enough on modern day frames.

Thirdly, as Fabian Cancellara showed from his wind tunnel testing, he is actually faster (cda vs. watts able to be put out) when he was in his aero position on the hoods.

So to just say you are going to be more aero, and thereby infer that one is therefore faster because you can get lower due to the head tube being lower is incorrect and doesn't tell the full story.
"Marginal gains are the only gains when all that's left to gain is in the margins."

User avatar
dj97223
Posts: 662
Joined: Sun Nov 06, 2005 7:27 pm

by dj97223

That Cipo is a master of marketing. :beerchug:
“If you save your breath I feel a man like you can manage it. And if you don't manage it, you'll die. Only slowly, very slowly, old friend.”

agfu
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2010 4:49 pm

by agfu

Love that last picture LB, really shows the muscular lines of the bike!

Agreed that this dark chrome paint scheme is beautiful, hope it makes it to final production as an option!

I think the headset/top tube cap you're referring to will be similar to the NK1K where it can be swapped with another insert to increase the stack height by 20mm whilst keeping the lines of the bike?

User avatar
kgt
Posts: 6748
Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2006 10:29 am
Location: Athens, Greece

by kgt

53x12 wrote:You of anyone, should know that it is stack + reach that matters for fit. Headtube doesn't matter as that can be made up +/- by fork length as already mentioned. (In addition to BB height, head tube angle...etc.)

Why talking theoretically? In the case of RB1000 it's long reach and short stack and short headtube. This frame is actually famous for its ultra agressive fit. Everybody nows that.

53x12 wrote:Secondly, with the use of negative angled stems, there is no issue getting low enough on modern day frames.

High stack and -17 stem is just the only way a pro can fit a frame that is designed for the amateur rider-consumer.

53x12 wrote:Thirdly, as Fabian Cancellara showed from his wind tunnel testing, he is actually faster (cda vs. watts able to be put out) when he was in his aero position on the hoods.

I would be the last one to claim that a more aero equals faster.

User avatar
53x12
Posts: 3762
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2006 6:02 am
Location: On the bike

by 53x12

kgt wrote:High stack and -17 stem is just the only way a pro can fit a frame that is designed for the amateur rider-consumer.


Who cares how a rider is able to get their fit dialed in or has to use a -17 stem. What matters is that pros and any competitive rider can fit as aggressive as they want with modern frames. Then there is that tipping point where it is "too" aggressive and you start putting out less watts.


kgt wrote:I would be the last one to claim that a more aero equals faster.


So then kgt, why would an prospective rider looking at frame geometries care that the stack is lower and that a rider can get lower?
"Marginal gains are the only gains when all that's left to gain is in the margins."

RyanH
Moderator
Posts: 1797
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2012 4:01 pm
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Contact:

by RyanH

53x12 wrote:So then kgt, why would an prospective rider looking at frame geometries care that the stack is lower and that a rider can get lower?


To look pro, obviously. :roll:
Strava
Current Stable. The Snob Machine
The Ex's. LS Siena: 6.21kg | Parlee Z5 SLi: 5.9kg | LS Xicon: 5.76kg | C59: 5.7kg | Cervelo R5ca: 5.09kg | Fuji Altamira SE - 6.2kg | Scott Foil - 6.2kg | Evo - 5.18kg | LS Classic - 6.7kg | The Crumpton - 5.9kg

stormur
Posts: 1182
Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2014 3:50 pm
Location: FIN

by stormur

seaneT1 wrote:Cipollini bikes do look aero but are they really? Have they been designed with the use of an aerotunel or do the just use aero designs for styling? Always wondered...whatever the case may be, they look bloody amazing!!! :up:


And other brands gave you real ( raw ) data ... or just claims ? ;) Any "claim" not supported by real data is just BS. Till now I didn't noticed that ANY brand published ( scientific meaning, something to verify ) DATA.

other thing is that wind tunnel vs real wind ... can be ( and mostly are ) completely different environment.
Go to Heaven for the climate, Hell for the company.
Mark Twain


I can be wrong, and have plenty of examples for that ;)

tranzformer
Posts: 875
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:36 pm

by tranzformer

stormur wrote:
seaneT1 wrote:Cipollini bikes do look aero but are they really? Have they been designed with the use of an aerotunel or do the just use aero designs for styling? Always wondered...whatever the case may be, they look bloody amazing!!! :up:


And other brands gave you real ( raw ) data ... or just claims ? ;) Any "claim" not supported by real data is just BS. Till now I didn't noticed that ANY brand published ( scientific meaning, something to verify ) DATA.

other thing is that wind tunnel vs real wind ... can be ( and mostly are ) completely different environment.


If you don't believe manufacturers aero claims, there is plenty of 3rd party data that you can look at. Go to ST and you will come across much of it.

Better yet, buy yourself a power meter and do the Chung Method. Than you can't be skeptical, think there is an agenda or other conspiracy theory nonsense. You'll have your own data that you yourself collected and analyzed. Chung method/field testing is the best thing you can do as you can test exactly your own equipment and setup.

http://fitwerx.com/ask-fitwerx-article- ... available/


seaneT1 wrote:Cipollini bikes do look aero but are they really? Have they been designed with the use of an aerotunel or do the just use aero designs for styling? Always wondered...whatever the case may be, they look bloody amazing!!! :up:


No, they are not aero. Just look aero. All show and no go as they say. Just made to look pretty with some nice PR + marketing. Nothing else.

User avatar
ergott
Posts: 2738
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 3:03 am
Location: Islip, NY
Contact:

by ergott

Actually -17 stem is more aero since the barrel is parallel to the ground and there's less frontal area

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

AJS914
Posts: 1895
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 6:52 pm

by AJS914

Better yet, buy yourself a power meter and do the Chung Method.


I remember Ryan's thread. It's not so easy. Plus you have to buy the frame first.

Does it even matter? I can't imagine someone buying or not buying a Cipo for it's aero properties.

by Weenie


Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post