Weight Weenies
* FAQ    * Search    * Trending Topics
* Login   * Register
HOME Listings Blog NEW Galleries NEW FAQ Contact About Impressum
It is currently Wed Sep 28, 2016 3:10 pm
Recently the board software has been updated and there are some known bugs/failures:
- Avatars are currently not being displayed ✔ FIXED
- Tapatalk connection is currently broken ✔ FIXED
- Avatars cannot be uploaded ✔ FIXED

Please note that we will soon do some changes in WW board template design in case to get a fully mobile/desktop responsiveness board!
If you find more errors please post it here: http://weightweenies.starbike.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=139062


All times are UTC+01:00





Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 91 posts ]  Go to page Previous 1 2 3 4 57 Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Jun 27, 2012 9:46 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 25, 2006 8:20 am
Posts: 243
Location: Zolder, Belgium.
Can someone please put the photo's here? I can't see them...


Top
   
Posted: Wed Jun 27, 2012 9:46 pm 


Top
   
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 27, 2012 9:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2007 7:18 pm
Posts: 612
spartan wrote:
your local trek dealer should have copy..whitepaper available on trek's dexter dealer site.


Link?

Thanks

_________________
http://cds-0.blogspot.com


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed Jun 27, 2012 10:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2003 1:37 am
Posts: 270
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
I'm impressed with the weight. They used to be the heaviest $12,000 bike on the market!

_________________
Curt Brown

2016 Cannondale EVO Etap 13.8#'s
2012 Cannondale Supersix EVO etap 13.7#'s
2015 Cannondale SUPER X 16.0#'s
2016 Cannondale FatCad2 28.1#'s
2011 Cannondale Carbon Flash 1 17.9#'s


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed Jun 27, 2012 11:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 7:26 am
Posts: 2021
Location: Atlanta, GA, US
No, that dubious honor belonged (and probably still does) to the Pinarello Dogma. :-)

_________________
My Bikes

My Photoblog


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed Jun 27, 2012 11:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2007 1:57 pm
Posts: 7899
Location: San Francisco, CA
Can you get a built-up Dogma for only $12k? :)

I didn't think the Treks (frame + fork) were ever particularly heavy. I've seen some decent numbers here on vintage Treks.

_________________
http://djconnel.blogspot.com/
Fuji SL/1


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed Jun 27, 2012 11:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2007 1:57 pm
Posts: 7899
Location: San Francisco, CA
Lou3000 wrote:
Ultimately, I guess it is the perfect bike to market. Is it aero? Kind of. Is it light? Yeah. Is it stiff? Sure. Sort of the old saying, Jack of all trades, Master of none. The perfect bike for your dentist.


First, thanks for posting the data!!! (previous page)

I disagree the brakes are going to be a big problem, and only because Trek has a massive dealer network, and the dealers simply wouldn't tolerate some sort of fringe maintenance nightmare.

On the "master of none" comment: compromise between various design trade-offs is the essence of engineering. Few people buy a bike for a single narrow specialty. Bikes needs to be well-rounded to win races.

_________________
http://djconnel.blogspot.com/
Fuji SL/1


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed Jun 27, 2012 11:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2010 5:03 pm
Posts: 2014
Location: San Francisco Peninsula
Roeboe wrote:
Can someone please put the photo's here? I can't see them...


After a few hours of playing around on the Project One site, this one is my favorite:

Image

Very similar to the pain scheme on my Ridley.

_________________
2013 Wilier Cento1 SR || 2009 Ridley Crossbow || 2011 Yeti AS-R 5 Carbon


Top
   
PostPosted: Thu Jun 28, 2012 12:46 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Sep 03, 2004 2:52 am
Posts: 850
interesting info for the aero weenies. fork/handlebar saved more drag than the frame :unbelievable:



src

https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B17X8q ... TBDVVFUazQ


2.1 Frame
The KVF tube shape allowed Trek to decrease overall bike wind resistance.
Trek relied heavily on KVF shaping on the head tube, down tube, seat tube and
seatstays. This reduced the frame drag by 60 grams, while simultaneously
improving the structural performance of the frame.
2.2 Fork/brakes
One of the most important components on a bicycle in terms of aerodynamic drag is
one of the first things to see the wind: the fork. Trek attacked the problem with two
key technologies: the KVF tube shape on the legs, and the integrated front brake. Trek
engineers started with the aerodynamic performance of Speed Concept’s 3-to-1-ratio
KVF tubes for the upper portion of the legs, and then blended to a 2-to-1 ratio for the
lower legs for improved performance and weight. The combined effect of optimized
aero shape and integrated front brake decreased aerodynamic drag by 76 grams.
2.3 Handlebar
The other key component on the front end of the bike to significantly affect
aerodynamics is the handlebar. Trek engineers applied KVF tube shaping to
the center sections of the handlebar to further reduce drag by 90 grams


Epic-o wrote:
spartan wrote:
your local trek dealer should have copy..whitepaper available on trek's dexter dealer site.


Link?

Thanks

_________________
Current Rides:

2016 Emonda ALR Team Issue E-Tap/Bora35


Top
   
PostPosted: Thu Jun 28, 2012 1:11 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2007 1:57 pm
Posts: 7899
Location: San Francisco, CA
It appears they tested without a rider. Since they claim 70 grams (sic) of drag reduction from the handlebars alone, I suspect that this advantage is considerably less with a rider filling the space behind the handlebars. Air which clears the bars on an empty bike is home free. With a rider, it's doomed anyway.

I like the move to brakes attached at multiple points instead of just one. It's old school new again, actually.

Image

_________________
http://djconnel.blogspot.com/
Fuji SL/1


Top
   
PostPosted: Thu Jun 28, 2012 2:32 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2011 4:55 pm
Posts: 46
djconnel wrote:
On the "master of none" comment: compromise between various design trade-offs is the essence of engineering. Few people buy a bike for a single narrow specialty. Bikes needs to be well-rounded to win races.


I totally agree that you can't have it all, you have to make compromises. I think the compromises in this case are weird. Looking at the depth of the tube shapes, it looks like there was more emphasis on ride quality and weight rather than aerodynamics. However, the bike is clearly being marketed as an aero bike. Hell at 750 grams with a 5 gram paint job, why not just sell it as an ultralight with aero sections.

In the end you have a bike with fairly shallow tubes (even when compared to other Kamm'd frames like the FOIL), a huge, blunt bottom bracket area, a round seat mast, and a downtube no where near the front wheel. Obvious design decisions were made to compromise all over the frame, but then you do something extremely controversial like using proprietary brakes. And not do something as simple as clean up the cabling.

Ultimately, the funny thing about this bike is that given my experience with Trek, the compelling selling point here is that you get a Trek bike (I've liked the recent Madone carbon offerings I've tried but the only Treks I've owned were the Fuel 9.9 when it first came out and the TTX more recently) with their geometry and ride quality, but at an ultralight 750grams. Throw in their dealer network and the awesome Project One and it is a great bike. I don't really need it to be aero. They had me at 750gram Trek Madone.


Top
   
PostPosted: Thu Jun 28, 2012 3:24 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2003 12:34 pm
Posts: 1670
Location: New York City
i like this frameset. wonder how much the brakes weigh. i hate all the marketing mumbo jumbo - oclv 700 hexSL carbon. seems like they are using hexcel im10 carbon which is stronger and stiffer than toray T1000. Made in USA is such a big thing for me, im a sucker for that.


Top
   
PostPosted: Thu Jun 28, 2012 3:29 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2006 6:02 am
Posts: 3239
Location: On the bike
djconnel wrote:
It appears they tested without a rider.



I have heard from several people who have spent considerable time in the wind tunnel that testing a frame with a rider on vs. not having a rider un doesn't make considerable differences with the overall drag of the frame. I think Mark Cote and a few other industry guys have said that.

_________________
"Marginal gains are the only gains when all that's left to gain is in the margins."


Top
   
PostPosted: Thu Jun 28, 2012 3:40 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2003 12:34 pm
Posts: 1670
Location: New York City
53x12 wrote:
djconnel wrote:
It appears they tested without a rider.



I have heard from several people who have spent considerable time in the wind tunnel that testing a frame with a rider on vs. not having a rider un doesn't make considerable differences with the overall drag of the frame. I think Mark Cote and a few other industry guys have said that.


what is the impact/difference a frame makes compared to the drag a persons body makes at say 40km/h?


Top
   
PostPosted: Thu Jun 28, 2012 3:45 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2006 6:02 am
Posts: 3239
Location: On the bike
^ Of course the body has a greater impact on its own compared to the bike. That is not the issue I was raising.

The issue is that the rider/bike interaction is not as great as some make it out to be. You missed the point.

Btw, don't quote the post directly above yours. Frankie doesn't like it. :)

_________________
"Marginal gains are the only gains when all that's left to gain is in the margins."


Top
   
PostPosted: Thu Jun 28, 2012 3:54 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2003 12:34 pm
Posts: 1670
Location: New York City
i wasnt trying to argue, i was trying to know what the difference is. and how much of a difference does an aero frame make compared to the overall effect your body and frame have.

either way, i think this bike looks clean and i like it. like i said before, im a sucker for made in USA products.


Top
   
Posted: Thu Jun 28, 2012 3:54 am 


Top
   
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 91 posts ]  Go to page Previous 1 2 3 4 57 Next

   Similar Topics   Author   Replies   Views   Last post 
There are no new unread posts for this topic. aero handlebars vs aero wheels vs aero frame

in Road

spectastic

7

1795

Mon Mar 28, 2016 3:34 pm

RyanH View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. 1999 Trek 5500 geometry is similar to what current Trek?

in Road

bikebike

5

397

Sat Aug 13, 2016 4:25 pm

AJS914 View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Aero+ Caliper Brakes VS Non Aero + Disc Brake Road Bikes

in Road

Jmdesignz2

11

2159

Mon Sep 19, 2016 4:08 am

spdntrxi View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. new bike obsession, aero quality of non-aero frames (Super S

[ Go to page: 1 2 ]

in Road

tacostand

17

3172

Fri Sep 02, 2016 2:37 am

justkeepedaling View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Attachment(s) Do Aero Road Bars look ok on Non Aero frames

[ Go to page: 13 4 5 6 7 ]

in Road

dreden513

95

6352

Mon Jul 25, 2016 11:51 am

NGtim View the latest post


All times are UTC+01:00


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: stk57, topflightpro, TurboTommy, tymon_tm, zalle and 29 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited