No, not those. Ones I am incorporating are REAL engineering.
Seriously, though, I am generally willing to give them more credit whenever I can, but HP stays and BMC clusters are just beyond me. On the other hand, many of the improvements indeed make good sense. If you look at a top end bike today compared to a 1980s steel bike, you can clearly see the difference. NGMN/Jsinclair
-- your comments are excellent points and I did consider these to some extent -- but will probably give them a bit more thought. The seattube is fairly "upright" at around 73-74 degrees, therefore the increase on the cross section is limited, but in the meantime, I am just not sure about a 3" wide seat mast/sail is consistent with the goal here. Those look a bit out of place and in my mind are reserved more for full-on TT bikes. In other words, I want the tube to be 80% "tubing" and 20% "fairing" and not the other way around.
In (further) other words, I am not mentally ready to do this just yet.
In addition, I am not sure structurally Kamm tail and a strict "V" shape (eg, Dogma, etc.) make sense due to the dirty air and the manufacturing complexities (carbon layup will be trickier around abrupt edges, and the internal bladders will have a harder time pressing the fibers to the clamshells. In real life people end up putting clay-like material to fill any imperfections and that's not very cool, is it?). I did give Kamm a lot of thought, and lost a fair bit of sleep over it before ruling it out. At the relatively low speeds of 15-30mph at which this bike will most likely travel during its lifetime, I feel an oval shape which will be rounder in the front (hence a true "egg" shape) strikes a decent balance.
Like many of the aero features you're looking at incorporating?
Fast falcons: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j3mTPEuFcWk
" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;www.falcobike.comFacebook: falcobikeglobal