Which one is fastest? UCI Time trial bike or non-UCI triathlon bike?

Discuss light weight issues concerning road bikes & parts.
User avatar
TonyM
Posts: 2621
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2015 4:11 pm

by TonyM

What do you think for let’s say a fully flat course or a flat course with just a few short hills?

User avatar
TonyM
Posts: 2621
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2015 4:11 pm

by TonyM

Just see that « Tour » 09/2017 made a test. Does anyone have the results?

by Weenie


clipsed
Posts: 61
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2015 12:48 pm

by clipsed

It's the same bike?

User avatar
TonyM
Posts: 2621
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2015 4:11 pm

by TonyM

clipsed wrote:It's the same bike?
No. Time trial with the UCI rules. Triathlon bikes don’t have to comply to the UCI rules.

EDIT: changed the title accordingly

Vermu
Posts: 247
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2010 6:39 am

by Vermu

UCI legal according to Tour.
https://ibb.co/hTj1c6


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

bm0p700f
in the industry
Posts: 4053
Joined: Sat May 12, 2012 7:25 pm
Location: Glermsford, Suffolk U.K
Contact:

by bm0p700f

it depends on the bike and the position the rider can adopt on the. the question is meaningless as a bike is not fast unless there is a rider pedalling it.

alcatraz
Posts: 1234
Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2016 11:19 am

by alcatraz

Here is a fast non-UCI bike. :D

Image

/a

CarlosFerreiro
Posts: 319
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 1:41 pm
Location: Shetland, Scotland

by CarlosFerreiro

Under the old UCI rules the aspect ratio of the fork was more limited, but with the revised ones, not so much.
Beyond that, the possible frame gains for non-UCI are more limited at low yaw anyhow.

Shrike
Posts: 1315
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2016 5:08 pm

by Shrike

BMC TT (Mavic CXR) 190.5
BMC Tri (Mavic CXR) 196.8

BMC's TT frame is faster than the Tri version in this case (little bit faster again if you stick it on 808's)

Canyon Speedmax TT (808) 190.1
Canyon Speedmax Tri (808) 190.4

Again, TT version faster though so small that it could be statistically insignificant.

Shame a lot of the setups don't have directly compatible wheelsets, but you can still get some takeaways from it. P5 with 808s is clearly a monster setup. Surprised the P5X didn't do better, would like to see it on some 808s and redone. The Enve's are nice and deep, though 808s are deeper. I'm thinking it's disc brake drag.

Anyway, not as expected, I was under the impression triathlon bikes were faster than TT bikes. That said, the tri bikes fully loaded with normal use food/kit etc will almost certainly be must faster than TT bikes with ad hoc straps and accessories. If you're doing tri, then tri bikes are definitely faster for you.

BikeAnon
Posts: 399
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2014 6:36 pm
Location: NY USA

by BikeAnon

UCI bike is faster.


Because it will be piloted by a pro cyclist.




The other will just be piloted by a tri-guy! ;)

Vermu
Posts: 247
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2010 6:39 am

by Vermu

Shrike wrote:BMC TT (Mavic CXR) 190.5
BMC Tri (Mavic CXR) 196.8

BMC's TT frame is faster than the Tri version in this case (little bit faster again if you stick it on 808's)

Canyon Speedmax TT (808) 190.1
Canyon Speedmax Tri (808) 190.4

Again, TT version faster though so small that it could be statistically insignificant.

Shame a lot of the setups don't have directly compatible wheelsets, but you can still get some takeaways from it. P5 with 808s is clearly a monster setup. Surprised the P5X didn't do better, would like to see it on some 808s and redone. The Enve's are nice and deep, though 808s are deeper. I'm thinking it's disc brake drag.

Anyway, not as expected, I was under the impression triathlon bikes were faster than TT bikes. That said, the tri bikes fully loaded with normal use food/kit etc will almost certainly be must faster than TT bikes with ad hoc straps and accessories. If you're doing tri, then tri bikes are definitely faster for you.
They used all that stuff in the test. Canyon which has perhaps most integrated food/water supply didn’t have advantage with those...
Image


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

wingguy
Posts: 4193
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 11:43 pm

by wingguy

Vermu wrote:
Sat Dec 23, 2017 8:38 am
UCI legal according to Tour.
https://ibb.co/hTj1c6
Or not. Looks like the fastest bike was the P5 Three (uci legal fork/brake) but they didn’t test the P5 Six (non UCI fork / brake shroud). I would be freakin’ amazed if the Six wasn’t faster than the Three, because otherwise why would Cervelo bother making it?

Vermu
Posts: 247
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2010 6:39 am

by Vermu

Tbh I do not understand most triathlon specific iterations. As felt is the only one faster than the tt-version. Yet still all are made.
Although this test was far from uniform as some had different wheels than other.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Shrike
Posts: 1315
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2016 5:08 pm

by Shrike

Vermu wrote:
Sat Dec 23, 2017 4:14 pm
Tbh I do not understand most triathlon specific iterations. As felt is the only one faster than the tt-version. Yet still all are made.
Although this test was far from uniform as some had different wheels than other.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Our test interpretation has a conceit to it I think. Current-gen tri bikes aren't designed to be faster than an unloaded TT bike. They're designed to be faster than this:

Image

Image

If you start to strap on all your crap to a standard TT frame, like bottles, food etc, then that causes a lot of drag. The tri bike then starts to make a lot of sense and is actually quite impressive considering how close they are to a clean TT bike.

In short, TT bikes are faster for TT's, tri bikes are faster for tri :o

wingguy
Posts: 4193
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 11:43 pm

by wingguy

Vermu wrote:
Sat Dec 23, 2017 4:14 pm
Tbh I do not understand most triathlon specific iterations. As felt is the only one faster than the tt-version. Yet still all are made.
Although this test was far from uniform as some had different wheels than other.
Because if you need to carry a whole bunch of other stuff on the frame to get through the long distance event, the integrated storgae solutions will be faster than your UCI TT bike with lots of storage boxes strapped onto it.

The P5X wasn't designed to be faster than a bare P5 at your local 10 or 25 mile TT. It was designed to faster than a fully loaded P5 on the 112 mile Kona course.

(PMSL at that flapjack top tube. Dude's probably got the best tasting bike there, if not the fastest :lol: :lol: :lol: )

by Weenie


Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post