3T Strada aero road bike is made for wide tires and 1×12 drivetrains

Discuss light weight issues concerning road bikes & parts.
Zitter
Posts: 553
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2011 9:12 pm
Location: Orange County

by Zitter

If I was just starting out cycling, I think a 40 x 10-40 would be awesome. I wouldn't know anything about gear jumps, all I know is I can go as easy or as hard as I want with one (or 2) levers

You can change your gear spread depending on where you're riding or fitness level which is a key factor too. Same range, just moved up or down

by Weenie


2lo8
Posts: 296
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2016 10:32 am

by 2lo8

So it's a bike for Freds?
[6.6kg of no carbon fiber]
[2lo8.wordpress.com]
Your one-stop source for information and reviews on cheap eBay bike junk.

Zitter
Posts: 553
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2011 9:12 pm
Location: Orange County

by Zitter

It's a bike for serious racers and Freds alike.

I have my Strada setup for fast rides and races and my Exploro setup for long training rides and adventures, but that's just gearing.

And regarding pros, there are many who would love to ride our bike but can't. Remember when everyone was riding rebadged Cervelos and Sartos? Can't really do that with a unique distinctive aero frame

User avatar
fa63
Posts: 2223
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 7:26 am
Location: Atlanta, GA, US

by fa63

I agree this is a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. Front derailleurs are not really problematic. If you can't set one up, your LBS will do it for $10-$15.

I say this as a former user of 1x11. Worked for gravel riding, but I didn't like the jump between gears for road riding.

But to each their own.

Zitter
Posts: 553
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2011 9:12 pm
Location: Orange County

by Zitter

I've said my piece. It's not for everyone, but if you see value in the advantages vs disadvantages then you'll love it. I've been riding it and smiling all the way.

We will be coming out with our own cassette btw...

User avatar
fa63
Posts: 2223
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 7:26 am
Location: Atlanta, GA, US

by fa63

I am guessing you work for 3T?

I can set up a front derailleur in less than 10 min, including sips of beer along the way. And I am just a home mechanic. Once I adjust it, it stays good until I change the cables once a year.

I am not buying the more aero argument until I see some data. And for the record, I am not some curmudgeon; I own an aero bike with aero wheels :)

I also don't agree with the more aesthetically pleasing part; a long cage rear derailleur / giant pie-plate cassette with a 46-48t chainring up front doesn't look good to me. But beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Anyways, good luck to you guys!

wingguy
Posts: 3505
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 11:43 pm

by wingguy

Zitter wrote:You can change your gear spread depending on where you're riding or fitness level which is a key factor too. Same range, just moved up or down

You can do that with cassettes too. Heck, you can change both gear range and spread with cassettes on a 2x system. It has huge versatility for different terrain if you're willing to invest a little time.

But... you think someone who wouldn't swap cassettes is suddenly going to be willing to swap chainrings? I doubt it.

Zitter
Posts: 553
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2011 9:12 pm
Location: Orange County

by Zitter

You get a much greater effect with chainring and don't run into as many issues with capacity. It's also pretty easy to change a chainring when you don't have to readjust the FD. Chainrings also last a lot longer than cassettes. Cassette keeps the range, chainring changes the spread

But as before, if you don't like it, there are many other traditional offerings out there.

Yes, I do work for 3T. I am lucky to be able to try many different configurations and testing scenarios. I'm no pro, but I'm good enough to know what works and doesn't work for me.

wingguy
Posts: 3505
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 11:43 pm

by wingguy

Zitter wrote:You get a much greater effect with chainring and don't run into as many issues with capacity. It's also pretty easy to change a chainring when you don't have to readjust the FD.

I don't usually bother readjusting the FD when I change a cassette either. Maybe that's just me :wink:

Cassette keeps the range, chainring changes the spread

What happens when you go from an 11-25 to 12-29?

Zitter
Posts: 553
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2011 9:12 pm
Location: Orange County

by Zitter

If you need that specific range, then run a 2x. No gun to your head. Chances are you can probably get something similar with a 1x, but I haven't gone through the gear calculator that far I guess

youngs_modulus
Posts: 507
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:03 am
Location: Madison, WI USA

by youngs_modulus

thumper88 wrote:"On a clincher, changing the rim width changes the radius of the casing arc, but it doesn't change whether it's circular."

I suspect this isn't quite accurate. Carry the thought out to an extreme... if the rim is so wide that the tire can bare be mounted on it, it will be little more than a flat rubber/cloth membrane spanning the rim. As you widen the wheel to approach that entirely hypothetical state, the tire will gradually be less circular in section than shallow U shape.
At any useful state it would be rounded, but I don't know about "circular."


The extreme case is perfectly valid: the casing will be a large-radius circular arc. This is unambiguous. Any other shape would require a much stiffer casing with nontrivial bending stiffness.

thumper88 wrote:The shape of the casing is not the pertinent thing when it comes to aerodynamics

Ya think?

I'm not sure how to make this any more clear: I'm talking about the shape of the casing. You're talking about the overall shape of the overall shape of the tire, which is the casing plus the tread. Differences in tire tread profiles alter the overall shape of the tire to a very small degree, but that's still enough to matter for aerodynamics. No one is arguing otherwise.


thumper88 wrote:it's the shape of the tire, which could conform exactly to casing shape or could be quite different based on whatever is glued or vulcanized to it.


The tread would have to be relatively stiff to change the shape of the inflated casing. A tread stiff enough to do this would have tremendous rolling resistance. Don't forget that the tread is an elastomer, and elastomers creep like crazy. Even if the tread were stiff enough to distort the casing, it would relax with time and the casing would tend to return to a circular state.


thumper88 wrote:From the years Iv e spent worrying like crazy about attached flow on sails and leading edge issues that trip the flow
Worrying in what capacity? Were you worrying because you were close-hauled, beating into the wind and hoping to bear up a little more? Or were you worrying in a professional capacity? If the latter, what kind of professional capacity?

thumper88 wrote:there may be something to the idea that Conti gets an advantage from tread, but... the advantage seems to be pretty large for it to be mainly the surface texture of the tire, it seems more likely to be tire shape...
Michelins and vittorias have done pretty badly in the tunnel and if it were simply a matter of molding in more texture they and others would fix it quickly...


You'd do better to point out that most Vittorias have a lot of texture while Michelins usually have none. You seem to think that Continental has somehow controlled casing shape to be non-circular. Do you think so? If so, how do you think they did it? (Hint: their casing plies are at roughly the same angle as everyone else's).

thumper88 wrote: But you've posted some interesting and useful stuff, I want to go back and read through the stuff you point to... Thanks for a thoughtful post.


Thanks; I'm glad you find it interesting. I do this sort of thing for a living (though no longer in the bike industry) and it's fun to apply my professional skills to my hobby. When I was racing as a junior, I didn't know anyone who knew why disc sew ups gripped the rim more at higher pressures, let alone why one pedal had left-hand threads. I'd be pleased if some people found this stuff useful, or at least interesting.

Edit: Damn you, autocorrect.

2lo8
Posts: 296
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2016 10:32 am

by 2lo8

Zitter wrote:Yes, I do work for 3T.

That answers a lot. Not drinking kool-aid. Making the kool-aid.
[6.6kg of no carbon fiber]
[2lo8.wordpress.com]
Your one-stop source for information and reviews on cheap eBay bike junk.

Zitter
Posts: 553
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2011 9:12 pm
Location: Orange County

by Zitter

Just because I work for them doesn't mean I don't have my own opinions. Took a while to convince me

glam2deaf
Posts: 597
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 4:36 am

by glam2deaf

Not going to lie, the angrier this bike makes people the more I want one. I don't really race anywhere mountainous, so a tighter range 1x set up could be ideal. Plus they look awesome.

by Weenie


RyanH
Moderator
Posts: 1687
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2012 4:01 pm
Location: Downtown Los Angeles, CA
Contact:

by RyanH

Just for clarification, 1x is a lot heavier than 2x since you need (or at least the mfg specs) a clutch rd, 1x chainrings weigh as much or more than 2x and the cassettes weigh more. I'm guessing you need more links too.

Methinks this 1x trend is driven by SRAM users...
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

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post