Canyon Aeroad CF 2011

Discuss light weight issues concerning road bikes & parts.
Post Reply
2 wheels
Posts: 4907
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2006 12:56 am

by 2 wheels

Canyon enters aero road market for 2011
http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/can ... t-for-2011
The hourglass-shaped head tube houses a downsized (for Canyon, that is) 1 1/8"-to-1 1/4" tapered steerer tube...
---
the extra-wide bottom bracket now utilizes press-fit bearing cups (for which Campagnolo is apparently now offering fitments).
---
Cables have also been moved inside the frame to maintain undisturbed tube surfaces and a special Shimano Dura-Ace Di2-equipped Aeroad CF will feature its own internal wiring configuration and a dedicated battery mount beneath the non-driveside chain stay.
---
Rather than use exclusively carbon fiber in the construction, Canyon adds in more flexible basalt fibers into the Aeroblade SL fork blades and seatpost to provide more flex over rough roads. In addition, the seatpost setback is easily adjustable from 15-35mm (yielding effective 70.6-73.5-degree seat tube angles) and a clever interchangeable chip system in the fork tips allows users to choose between 39 or 44mm of rake,...
---
Size-specific tubing should maintain the intended ride feel across the range, and head tube lengths have dropped about 10mm across the board as a result of feedback from Omega Pharma-Lotto riders. Canyon says it also has a special integrated stem in development that will allow for extra-low handlebar positions.

Target frame weights for the Aeroad CF are 980-1,130g, depending on size – an increase of about 70-100g over a comparably sized Ultimate CF SLX. Thoma also admits that the Aeroad CF's slimmer tube shapes produce lower stiffness test numbers than the ultra-efficient CF or CF SLX but stresses that its better aerodynamics will still make it a faster – and more comfortable – bike in certain situations.
---

Image
Internal cable routing helps clean up the frame surfaces.

Image
Canyon says it focused on reducing frontal area and smoothing transition areas on the Aeroad CF to help reduce drag.

Image
Canyon continues to use a special German-made Acros headset that requires no top cap.

Image
The very thin seat stays contribute to the noticeably good comfort of the Aeroad CF.

Image
Cables make a brief appearance down at the bottom bracket before heading back inside the frame on their way to the derailleurs.

Image
Canyon has passed over its usual Maximus asymmetrical seat tube design in favor of a relatively narrow and symmetrical one to reduce frontal area.

Image
A mix of stiff carbon and flexible basalt fibers in the Aeroad CF's new VCLS seatpost lends considerable vertical flex to the rear end. Setback is adjustable from 15-35mm.

Image
Seatpost binder threads are integrated into the frame but Canyon says they'll withstand over 12Nm of torque (the spec calls for only 5-7Nm) before any damage occurs - and even then it says the bolt head will snap, not the frame threads.

Image
Canyon steps down its tapered steerer dimensions a notch to 1 1/8"-to-1 1/4" on the Aeroad CF to yield a narrower front end.

Image
The top tube is dead-straight but slightly sloping.

Image
Canyon frame designers perhaps could have maintained more top tube width on the Aeroad CF to gain front triangle stiffness.

Image
Canyon says the Aeroad CF's 20 percent reduction in frontal area reduces its aerodynamic drag relative to the Ultimate CF or Ultimate CF SLX.

Image
The tapered 1 1/8"-to-1 1/4" head tube features an hourglass shape to help minimize the frontal area.

Image
Canyon Bicycles launches into the aero road bike market with its new Aeroad CF.

Image
The well bolstered bottom bracket area helps contribute to the good pedaling efficiency when in the saddle.

Image
The bottom bracket shell is extra-wide with press-fit bearing cups - and new fitment options apparently include Campagnolo Ultra-Torque as seen here.

Image
Canyon extends the down tube just a bit further past the bottom bracket shell on its new Aeroad CF.

Image
A removable rear brake housing stop should make for easier routing through the top tube.

Image
Chain stays are similar in size to those of the Ultimate CF and Ultimate CF SLX.

Image
Canyon will offer the Aeroad CF in white or black plus team and special Erik Zabel-edition colors.

Image
The Aeroad CF uses a new derailleur hanger that's stiffer for better shifting and revised shaping for faster wheel changes.

Image
The uniquely adjustable fork rake allows Aeroad CF users to tune the handling to their preferences, from as quick as the Ultimate CF range to just a bit more stable.

Image
The new Canyon Aeroad CF wears a deep-profile head tube and down tube.

Image
Front triangle torsional rigidity on the Aeroad CF is noticeably softer than the Utimate CF SLX or standard CF, but the bike is also more comfortable.

Image
German cycling legend Erik Zabel provided Canyon with valuable test input during the Aeroad CF's development.

by Weenie


Hibbs
Posts: 112
Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2009 2:22 pm

by Hibbs

Very nice! I have a soft spot for Canyons these days and that is teasing that spot nicely. :thumbup: Not so sure about slight loss of stiffness, but I suppose it's all relative and a slightly less-stiff Canyon will be as stiff as most other things.

record
Posts: 944
Joined: Sun Dec 17, 2006 12:02 pm
Location: EU

by record

I think I don't like it. It looks awful and I hate the fact that they decided to lose some stiffness just to make it's weight look better - that's not Canyon style we all know.

But, I like the idea of adjustable fork rake and pressfit bearing which I believe we will see in the new Ultimate CF. Di2 specific version is nice as well :thumbup:
A light bike does replace good fitness.

User avatar
Roel W
Posts: 649
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 9:39 am
Location: Belgium

by Roel W

Who needs an adjustable fork rake?
And why did they gave up the 1/4" stem?
CANYON Ultimate AL 2010
CANYON Ultimate CF SL 2014
CANYON Ultimate CF SL disc 2018
Instagram @roeleur

bikedoc
Posts: 642
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2007 3:16 pm

by bikedoc

is it just me who would be slightly worried about the two drop outs which hold your front wheel on being held on by 2 tiny allen keys?
what happens if one side comes loose, your front wheel wouldnt be point forwards anymore and if both side came loose, well i guess you would stop pretty quick

brearley
Posts: 354
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2008 10:08 pm
Location: Hull

by brearley

guessing they got rid of it for practicality reasons? its a lot easier to find 1 1/8th stems

think this may be my next road frame if i can ever afford one, any ideas on price?

User avatar
djconnel
Posts: 7926
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2007 1:57 pm
Location: San Francisco, CA
Contact:

by djconnel

record wrote:I think I don't like it. It looks awful and I hate the fact that they decided to lose some stiffness just to make it's weight look better - that's not Canyon style we all know.

But, I like the idea of adjustable fork rake and pressfit bearing which I believe we will see in the new Ultimate CF. Di2 specific version is nice as well :thumbup:


To the contrary, I love the fact they decided to deviate from silly Tour Magazine score optimization. Cutting back a bit on stiffness was reported by CyclingNews to increase comfort, cutting back on the super-fat tubes reduces wind drag, and cutting back on head tube length gives a bit more range on handlebar position for those with a longer arm-to-torso length ratio (like me). There's always the prior frames if you're a stiffness weenie.

I also like the adaptation of stack-reach based fitting, even from a selfish perspective I prefer a steep seat tube.

I also love the balance struck between aero and not creating a bloated boat of carbon fiber (like some of the aero frames): I don't think any of the other aero frames with internal cables are quite this light. One should assume the weight spec is for the unpainted version.

I'd definitely consider getting this frame if I was in the market for something in this mass range. It's the first Canyon I've felt that way about.

koebes
Posts: 220
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2008 3:38 pm
Location: Germany

by koebes

doesn't look as the S2/3 to me :noidea:

User avatar
Roel W
Posts: 649
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 9:39 am
Location: Belgium

by Roel W

bikedoc wrote:is it just me who would be slightly worried about the two drop outs which hold your front wheel on being held on by 2 tiny allen keys?


I was thinking the same.
I wouldn't feel fine riding that fork. Hopefully I'm wrong and the Canyon engineers did their job.
CANYON Ultimate AL 2010
CANYON Ultimate CF SL 2014
CANYON Ultimate CF SL disc 2018
Instagram @roeleur

User avatar
djconnel
Posts: 7926
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2007 1:57 pm
Location: San Francisco, CA
Contact:

by djconnel

I don't think it's an issue. The quick release clamps onto a fixed portion. The rake adjustment simply positions the quick release. It's no different than an adjustment screw on a horizontal quick release. Sure, there's a bit less area for the quick release to grab onto, but this shouldn't be an issue. Once riding, the screw could vaporize and nothing would happen.

record
Posts: 944
Joined: Sun Dec 17, 2006 12:02 pm
Location: EU

by record

djconnel wrote:To the contrary, I love the fact they decided to deviate from silly Tour Magazine score optimization. Cutting back a bit on stiffness was reported by CyclingNews to increase comfort


Ultimate CF is really comfy while maintaining ultra high stiffness level, why they didn't do that with the Aeroad? The reason is simple. If they did, this frame would no longer be considered light for an aero frame and weight is important, cause it's clearly visible for customers. If the weight numbers were starting from 1100g, potential customers would see that, stiffness level? No they can't see that before buying a frame.

Also I don't get an idea that stood behind this project. They made a frame which gains will be mostly visible for people who ride at high speeds or more simply - people who race. And when you race stiffness is more important than some 100g in your frame weight. Making an aero, race frame less stiff just seems silly to me. More sensible wold be to make a proper racing frame - aero and stiff in their line up and a second frame with round tubing, more comfort and less weight for casual riders. Aeroad is a nonsense mix.
A light bike does replace good fitness.

User avatar
occor
Posts: 826
Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2006 5:22 am
Location: LA, CA

by occor

"is it just me who would be slightly worried about the two drop outs which hold your front wheel on being held on by 2 tiny allen keys?"

I'd bet the drop outs are shaped to mate up into/plug into slots in the ends of the fork blades so they can't move.

User avatar
Roel W
Posts: 649
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 9:39 am
Location: Belgium

by Roel W

djconnel wrote:I don't think it's an issue. The quick release clamps onto a fixed portion. The rake adjustment simply positions the quick release. It's no different than an adjustment screw on a horizontal quick release. Sure, there's a bit less area for the quick release to grab onto, but this shouldn't be an issue. Once riding, the screw could vaporize and nothing would happen.


I can be wrong but to me it seems like the whole dropout can be turned 180° and the drop-out is attached to the fork with a single tiny bolt.
Maybe we have to wait for more info before jumping into conclusions.
CANYON Ultimate AL 2010
CANYON Ultimate CF SL 2014
CANYON Ultimate CF SL disc 2018
Instagram @roeleur

User avatar
cryoplasm
Posts: 852
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 11:20 pm

by cryoplasm

I do not like it. The adjustable rake is a gimmick IMO.

User avatar
djconnel
Posts: 7926
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2007 1:57 pm
Location: San Francisco, CA
Contact:

by djconnel

record wrote: If the weight numbers were starting from 1100g, potential customers would see that, stiffness level? No they can't see that before buying a frame.


I've never seen a theoretical or engineering-based justification for the assertion that the level of stiffness needed to rank highly in the Tour tests is beneficial (to the contrary all analyses I've seen have concluded frame flex only stores energy, rather than dissipates it). On the other hand even the simplest analysis with the power-speed equations shows the (perhaps small) benefit of reduced mass. So to me any advantage of stiffness is a matter of "feel", and I've not ridden enough bikes to draw fair conclusions from feel.

Being engineering-oriented, I therefore tend to value stiffness relatively less than light weight.

by Weenie


Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post