by Guyeclipse on Sun Oct 14, 2012 7:36 am
I struggle to see the validity in these tests. First of all the weight test is completely skewed initially by adding 250g to every bike that isn't an ISP. This is ridiculous as you don't have to look far to find an exceptional alloy one that weighs a lot less than 250g. Also the notable mention of any other ISP bike was really missed in terms of comparing apples for apples. And through trial and error of bike manufacturers, they realised they would rather pay the small weight penalty and take a standard post over an ISP in preference of better ride quality because there is a tendency for ISP's to provide a bit more harshness through the saddle. I think that Giant's thinking here for that reason is very outdated because ISP's were a fad about 4 years ago that was phased out for this reason.
The blend of carbon fibre used is called T-800 which is actually a intermediate modulus carbon from the giants in this industry, Toray. Which I find it unusual how Giant can claim this as their own work. Basically what they have done is go along to Toray, found a nice top shelf carbon taken it back to their designers and said "go build". This blend of carbon is generally found in cheap Chinese frames, and I don't have anything against Chinese frames as I know a few people who have them and love them, however there has always been questions about how they cope and behave in crashes.
I see Giant's way as a little bit of an easy way out. When you compare this to the approach at BMC for their Impec model, they have revolutionised carbon composites in cycling who through intense innovation took a completely different approach and sought only absolute precision and perfection.
Also I noticed an absence of bikes that their mosed is actually competing against. For example where was the new Madone? They only tested the old one. Also the Scott Addict, really? That is ages old in terms of bike years and has been superseded by the Foil. They highlighted that there was a lack of their bikes in bike tests, but isnt that exactly what they have done here with outdated models?
And as the great aerodynamicists of the world are proving, aerodynamics plays a greater role than weight does in the behaviour of a bike. So to claim they 'win' is just highlighting that they only win these tests in a controlled and biased environment designed for them to win on. I am the proud owner of a Felt AR and can testify to the gains associated with aerodynamics that can be made. Felt claims (I know, just as biased) a 1.6kg effective weight loss over non aerodynamic profiles, however I didn't see Giant do a windtunnel test to claim their resounding victory over all other bikes available.
Finally, most of your bikes time will not be spent on a flex rig, nor when you are riding it, will you be riding it on a set of scales. So my advice is, don't pay attention to any of these bike tests unless you are a pro rider like Andre Greipel and you are concerned there is too much deflection at the bottom bracket of your Ridley. Just go along to your local bike store, pick out a bike you like, ride it and see if it suits your riding style then buy it because most of these tests are marketing BS.