Parlee ESX Aero

[prendrefeu]

@lobular and dgasmd
"These things won't sell."

Ha! It'll sell. It will sell damn well.
Why?
Pinarello Dogma, that's why.
Hell, any high-end model from a known brand, that's why.

It will sell.

It appears to be one of the first framesets that is intentionally designed around the concept of the rider using a water bottle. Shocking, I know.
Many other 'aero' frames perform testing without a water bottle in place. It's fairly evident when you look at the brand-provided images as well: where is the water bottle?

Either that, or maybe Parlee just wants you to think they've designed it for aeroness with water bottle. They can't be held responsible if people jump to the wrong conclusion.

Good point, we won't know for sure. Simultaneously there are those who were shitting their pants for the Specialized Venge when it came out, and those who criticized it (myself included in the latter group). The new Felt AR series gets recently introduced, and people are shitting their paints over how aero it is... yet... not necessarily designed for a water bottle and it is pointed out that other designed frames are more aero with a water bottle. The same sort of scenario (aesthetics splitting the crowd) came around with the Cervelo S5, Giant Propel, etc:...) So it's really just speculation and opinions, really.

A proper aero assessment is in order, but even that is hard to come by: magazines only do it so often, restricted by budget and whether a mfg will give them a frame or not, then they also have their own interests for sponsorship (that question will never go away with media, sorry Caley @ VeloNews), and then there's that question of how it was tested: dummy? no dummy? torso? moving legs? water bottles? cages? Wheels? No wheels? Standard components?

We might as well find out how many licks it takes to get to the tootsie roll center of a tootsie pop. That might be more definitive at this point.

[madcow]

There is a fair amount of discussion around about if it's really aero and again about the inclusion of the bottle. I was quite surprised to see how much actual time was spent in the wind tunnel not only refining their design but testing competitors as well. I've got the aero data and am fairly impressed with the amount of open-ness it contains rather than just generalizations and brand-x comparisons. Not only was the ESX tested both with and without bottles but so were all the other bikes. We'll publish this info shortly so everyone can reach their own decisions.

[audiojan]

Just to be clear, we have 3 Parlee's in the family, so definitely biased… When's the last time Parlee released something that wasn't good? Ok, I agree that maybe it's not the prettiest frame out there, but also not the worst. I bet that if Parlee say it's aerodynamically efficient, it is.

[bricky21]

It only looks weird because it's a Parlee. I'v seen a lot worse from other manufactures. BMC comes to mind.

If the aero numbers stand up to some scrutiny (from folks that understand them) then I'm guessing it'll be a hit.

Personally, I think it could use a racier paint job.

Is this one of the lightest aero frames yet?

[justkeepedaling]

It appears to be one of the first framesets that is intentionally designed around the concept of the rider using a water bottle. Shocking, I know.
Many other 'aero' frames perform testing without a water bottle in place. It's fairly evident when you look at the brand-provided images as well: where is the water bottle?

When a water bottle is added to the image straight away you know that the frame was designed around actual, real-life use.... You know, a rider actually riding it, and shockingly, needing a source of portable water supply along their ride.

I like this frame quite a bit. The comments thus far have been interesting.

Totally false, Cervelo S5, S3, Giant Propel, Scott Foil, and likely many more are all designed for water bottles.

This thing is like an abomination. I would guess that it isn't all that aero and it sure as hell isn't pretty. It will take an independent test to convince me that this is on the same level as a S5 (the test better have a dummy on it... preferably without moving legs)

[Calnago]

...Ok, I agree that maybe it's not the prettiest frame out there, but also not the worst. I bet that if Parlee say it's aerodynamically efficient, it is.

Fact is, ANY bike is aero compared to the flailing blob of human flesh sitting on top, but that's been discussed to death already. People will buy aero frames, not disputing that. Let them. It's their right. People buy skinny jeans too, and many just shouldn't. But it's their right .
And just out of curiosity, which frame would you consider uglier, if this isn't the worst...just for a point of reference?

[Ozrider]

More info about the design on Bikerumor.com

http://www.bikerumor.com/2013/11/14/all ... more-69393

Some images from Bikerumor.com








Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[cyclenutnz]

Litespeed did a bottle shroud quite early on, Neil Pryde another addition to the list. It's (generally) only first gen aero road bikes that don't (unsure about new Felt). I doubt we'll see many independent tests - it's just too expensive to be anything more than an oddity.

For the guy who brought up rear caliper placement - various data suggests that the impact of seatstay mount vs BB mount would be 10-20% of the negative impact that discs have.

I would need to see some stunning results from well conducted tests to get past the ugliness of the frame - I don't particularly care about weight and don't have an issue with the ride quality of aero bikes I've been on. I'll be sure to put the aero results into my course models to evaluate whatever claims are made.

People buy skinny jeans too

My wife threw mine out when we met. Though they weren't orginally intended as skinny jeans (cyclist thighs FTW). I suspect she would have a similar response to this frame.

[justkeepedaling]

Very Very odd airfoil. Too much attempted pressure recovery on the trailing edge. Flow will immediately separate due to the high adverse pressure gradient

[prendrefeu]

I don't particularly care about weight

I guess you spend a lot of time not climbing?



Personally, I spend the majority of my riding time in the mountains, with most climbs above 5% and typically averaging in the 8-9% on the day.
While aero is nice, I haven't found it necessary and frankly the frame is the least priority for aero in gains vs. money spent. The body comes first, clothing with that, helmet, gloves/no gloves, wheels... frame is way down the list. Aero is nice. Definitely. Weight should not be ignored either: gravity never goes away and is a constant rate on the earth's surface, but your relative air speed (and hence the ability for 'aero' shapes to have significant affect) is variable.

But hey, it's trendy now.

[carbon2329]

I couldn't agree more.

[justkeepedaling]

If you calculate the total gradient of your entire ride, what % do you get?
And yes, saving 30+ grams of drag is quite significant

[Calnago]

I bet this thing has a wonderful personality.

[SLCBrandon]

Wow.........just wow. I'm not kidding when I say I don't think I'd ride it if given to me. I have a reputation to uphold.....

[tinozee]

Good on parlee to make an aero frame. I don't think it looks that horrible.

I like light bikes that can to it all like z5, Tarmac or Addict. If I go aero for flat riding I will use a full TT bike. There is a pretty competitive TT series near me that I do that has a "cannibal" category, for traditional road bikes with no clip-ons allowed. That would be a perfect use for this bike. Also any race with a flat sprint finish or crits are where these aero bikes shine. And obviously you have to perfect all the other stuff first before this makes sense - great position, slim fit gear, deep wheels, etc. I'm sure we will see some upright Johnnys on these eventually though lol.

I like seeing new frames come out. The more the merrier.