2019 PRO thread

Questions about bike hire abroad and everything light bike related. No off-topic chat please

Moderator: Moderator Team

User avatar
jcrr
Posts: 122
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2011 4:36 am
Location: Seattle, WA

by jcrr

Some (not all) of the details of the shiv TT bike makes me think of the Walser bikes from back in the day. If I remember correctly, those Walsers were rebadged most notably as Giants and Bianchis under Jan Ulrich, before they were produced by Focus. Even so, the Walsers had the frame much closer to the rear wheel. As @ichobi mentions, spez will tell us the shiv TT is the second fastest behind the non-uci-compliant shiv.

Jungels' position looks pretty dang aero.


Image
"If it ain't broken, it could be lighter"

by Weenie


CrankAddictsRich
Posts: 1576
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 1:39 pm
Contact:

by CrankAddictsRich

jcrr wrote:
Tue May 21, 2019 7:49 pm
As @ichobi mentions, spez will tell us the shiv TT is the second fastest behind the non-uci-compliant shiv.
You know, it is a common misconception that the non-UCI compliant bikes are faster... I want to say it was one of the podcasts I heard with Josh Poertner from Silca (formerly of Zipp) and he said that in some cases, they are, but in some cases they are not. Yes, they're shapes appear to be more aero and they don't obey the 3:1 rule, but that doesn't necessarily mean they're faster. On some of the Non-UCI bikes it is very difficult to get a low TT position. They are designed for Triathlon riding to be efficient and preserve muscles and energy for the run, but not necessarily the fastest TT. They're also desined around the fact that they have to be fast while carrying the supplies and hydration for a 100+ mile ride.

nathanong87
Resident master of GIF
Posts: 3315
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2011 2:44 am
Contact:

by nathanong87

jcrr wrote:
Tue May 21, 2019 7:49 pm

Jungels' position looks pretty dang aero.
looks like majka needs moar time in the tunnel.

User avatar
LouisN
Posts: 2609
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 3:44 am
Location: Canada

by LouisN

CrankAddictsRich wrote:
Tue May 21, 2019 8:28 pm
jcrr wrote:
Tue May 21, 2019 7:49 pm
As @ichobi mentions, spez will tell us the shiv TT is the second fastest behind the non-uci-compliant shiv.
You know, it is a common misconception that the non-UCI compliant bikes are faster... I want to say it was one of the podcasts I heard with Josh Poertner from Silca (formerly of Zipp) and he said that in some cases, they are, but in some cases they are not. Yes, they're shapes appear to be more aero and they don't obey the 3:1 rule, but that doesn't necessarily mean they're faster. On some of the Non-UCI bikes it is very difficult to get a low TT position. They are designed for Triathlon riding to be efficient and preserve muscles and energy for the run, but not necessarily the fastest TT. They're also desined around the fact that they have to be fast while carrying the supplies and hydration for a 100+ mile ride.

A "fast" bike needs a rider on it.
IMO it's the UCI bike measurment rules that "limit" performance, based on some random numbers.
If some riders are faster than others, you have to take into account their body measurments fit better inside UCI's limits than others.
Ask a bike fitter to fit a rider based on ideal aero and performance measurments on a TT/Tri bike. Then tell him the bike fit needs to be UCI legal. I bet he'll have to change a few adjustments, not based on aero gains, but just to fit the rules...it's a trade-off...and all depending on the riders body measurments...

Louis :)

Nefarious86
Moderator
Posts: 3001
Joined: Sun May 25, 2014 4:57 am
Contact:

by Nefarious86

100%it's a trade off. Look at the guys in the UK.

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk

Using Tapatalk

User avatar
jcrr
Posts: 122
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2011 4:36 am
Location: Seattle, WA

by jcrr

@CrankAddictsRich- Oh, I agree with you. I was being facetious about what manufacturers claim.
"If it ain't broken, it could be lighter"

ichobi
Posts: 878
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2012 11:30 pm

by ichobi

Tour magazine did test sometimes ago a direct comparison between the tri and tt version of the same model. i.e. the p5-six (not the latest one) vs the p5x. The old shiv and the old shiv tri - in most case, the TT bikes tested faster if I remembered correctly. The tri bike is "fast" within the context that it usually comes with aero comparment that make carrying food and water streamlined with the bike. But for pure speed, the Tour mag seems to suggest that the 'cleaner' version of the bike wins out.

So I guess from the CdA equation, the TT bike will always have less 'A' by design. The larger airfoil shaped tubes of the tri bikes don't seem to negate larger surface area. (my assumption), at least in the tested bikes but probably don't apply to all tri bike.

The new Shiv looks almost identical to the new Shiv Tri except a few part. (1) Fork being less deep (obviously to comply with the UCI reg). (2) It has a deeper seat tube, probably to compensate the fact that the tri version has a matching water tank attached behind it to delay flow separation. (3) The seat stay is a tad higher to comlpy with uci reg). The headtube shape looks similar.

CrankAddictsRich
Posts: 1576
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 1:39 pm
Contact:

by CrankAddictsRich

LouisN wrote:
Tue May 21, 2019 9:00 pm
A "fast" bike needs a rider on it.
IMO it's the UCI bike measurment rules that "limit" performance, based on some random numbers.
If some riders are faster than others, you have to take into account their body measurments fit better inside UCI's limits than others.
Ask a bike fitter to fit a rider based on ideal aero and performance measurments on a TT/Tri bike. Then tell him the bike fit needs to be UCI legal. I bet he'll have to change a few adjustments, not based on aero gains, but just to fit the rules...it's a trade-off...and all depending on the riders body measurments...

Louis :)
Yes... actually... that just furthers my point.. On many Triathlon, NON-UCI bikes It can be difficult to get the front as low as you want to ruly be as fast as possible in a TT. The headtubes are taller to get riders to sit up a bit more to be compfortable for 100+ miles. For sure though, there are fit rules that need to be followed for UCI compliance that can take away some aero.

User avatar
Dan Gerous
Posts: 806
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2007 6:28 pm

by Dan Gerous

With the smaller sections, the new Shiv should be much lighter and perhaps easier to handle, especially in windy conditions, something Julian Alaphilippe might be happy with, remember this?

Image

jever98
Posts: 886
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 12:02 pm
Location: Seattle

by jever98

Wowzer, had never seen that! Makes me cringe to look at it.
----
No longer in the industry

User avatar
LouisN
Posts: 2609
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 3:44 am
Location: Canada

by LouisN

CrankAddictsRich wrote:
Wed May 22, 2019 12:51 am
LouisN wrote:
Tue May 21, 2019 9:00 pm
A "fast" bike needs a rider on it.
IMO it's the UCI bike measurment rules that "limit" performance, based on some random numbers.
If some riders are faster than others, you have to take into account their body measurments fit better inside UCI's limits than others.
Ask a bike fitter to fit a rider based on ideal aero and performance measurments on a TT/Tri bike. Then tell him the bike fit needs to be UCI legal. I bet he'll have to change a few adjustments, not based on aero gains, but just to fit the rules...it's a trade-off...and all depending on the riders body measurments...

Louis :)
Yes... actually... that just furthers my point.. On many Triathlon, NON-UCI bikes It can be difficult to get the front as low as you want to ruly be as fast as possible in a TT. The headtubes are taller to get riders to sit up a bit more to be compfortable for 100+ miles. For sure though, there are fit rules that need to be followed for UCI compliance that can take away some aero.
Low enough is not the problem. The problem comes with the front - aft position UCI "limits" ( 5cm saddle front-to-BB center - 80 cm bar end shifters, and only one exemption allowed) , and all the rider morphology problems that come with it.

Louis :)

Wookski
Posts: 1036
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2016 5:51 am

by Wookski

Dan Gerous wrote:
Wed May 22, 2019 1:13 am
With the smaller sections, the new Shiv should be much lighter and perhaps easier to handle, especially in windy conditions, something Julian Alaphilippe might be happy with, remember this?
Remember the aftermath but apart from this pic I haven’t seen any video. I guess that’s what happens when you run a disc/ sail on a super windy day!

Nefarious86
Moderator
Posts: 3001
Joined: Sun May 25, 2014 4:57 am
Contact:

by Nefarious86

CrankAddictsRich wrote:Custom bars for Roglic, Campenaerts and Nibali in the second TT at the Giro.

Image

Image

Image

Maybe custom bars for Yates, as well?

Image

Shiv TT Disc for Jungels and Majka in the second TT.

Image

Image
Surely these are pushing the limitsImage

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk

Using Tapatalk

BdaGhisallo
Posts: 2226
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 1:38 pm

by BdaGhisallo

Nefarious86 wrote:
Wed May 22, 2019 8:17 am
Surely these are pushing the limits

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk
These bars have passed inspection by the UCI Commissars on every occasion they have been used. But, then again, that doesn't mean that on some date in the future the UCI HQ or some commissar in the field won't change their mind and declare them to be illegal.

nathanong87
Resident master of GIF
Posts: 3315
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2011 2:44 am
Contact:

by nathanong87

Nefarious86 wrote:
Wed May 22, 2019 8:17 am
Surely these are pushing the limitsImage
pushing limits yea, but i can also see how the custom extensions pass also.

by Weenie


Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post