New BMC Aero frame TMR01

Discuss light weight issues concerning road bikes & parts.
SSB
Posts: 231
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2011 3:46 am
Location: Toronto

by SSB

pastronef wrote:so after the cobble bike, now the aero bike.
anyone knows the fate of the poor old Impec? :mrgreen:

There are a few out there. One of the shops in town displayed them in March and were actually selling them.
Flickr
2012 Cannondale CAAD10

CamW
Posts: 206
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 10:26 pm
Location: New Zealand

by CamW

maxxevv wrote:It seems to be designed for both mechanical as well as electronic shifting in mind. There clearly is a tab to cover the entrance for cable routing just above the fork interface here:

"large pic"


I think you'll find thats actually a frame bumper for the fork :wink:

User avatar
prendrefeu
Posts: 8609
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 10:32 pm
Location: Los Feliz, Los Angeles, California
Contact:

by prendrefeu

I really hope:
1) There will be an analogue/non-electronic version of the frame available.
2) The weight will be at least reasonable for WW standards. (900g target for 56 w/o brake pads & cables)

...the Scott Foil is another "aero-ish" frame that his the 900g/56 target fairly well, why can't BMC do the same? :twisted:
Exp001 || Other projects in the works.

User avatar
53x12
Posts: 3762
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2006 6:02 am
Location: On the bike

by 53x12

" 2) The weight will be at least reasonable for WW standards. (900g target for 56 w/o brake pads & cables)

...the Scott Foil is another "aero-ish" frame that his the 900g/56 target fairly well, why can't BMC do the same? :twisted: "

Because BMC operatus modi has never been crazy lightweight. They make "light" bikes, but nothing like others in the industry. They have always been about making the best overall bike (stiffness, comfort, weight, handling, sprinting...etc.).
"Marginal gains are the only gains when all that's left to gain is in the margins."

User avatar
prendrefeu
Posts: 8609
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 10:32 pm
Location: Los Feliz, Los Angeles, California
Contact:

by prendrefeu

So therefore 900g is a reasonable hope for BMC, no?

Since "light" is now hovering in the 700g mark. Neil Pryde Bura, Storck, Cervelo, others that aim for light are hitting that. 900g is the new "decent" :twisted:
Exp001 || Other projects in the works.

User avatar
53x12
Posts: 3762
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2006 6:02 am
Location: On the bike

by 53x12

The BMC Team Maching SLR01 (their "lightweight frame" hit 920g in a 53cm. I can see this frame hitting under 1000g, but I don't think you will see hit 900g even.
"Marginal gains are the only gains when all that's left to gain is in the margins."

KWalker
Posts: 5846
Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2009 8:30 pm
Location: Bay Area

by KWalker

prendrefeu wrote:So therefore 900g is a reasonable hope for BMC, no?

Since "light" is now hovering in the 700g mark. Neil Pryde Bura, Storck, Cervelo, others that aim for light are hitting that. 900g is the new "decent" :twisted:


Of those frames only 1 is being ridden in the pro tour and only by marquee riders. It also costs 2-3x what a BMC does. I'm guessing BMC will sell more bikes with slightly higher weight and lower offering price thus making a higher profit.

Seriously though you have to look at who actually buys most aero bikes. Most Venge owners aren't the 1% on here that care about weight or actually compare aero tests. Its people that walk in, want a new bike, have a lot of cash, and pick the first thing that looks nice and comports with their idea of what's important that day. The rest is made up post-hoc.
Don't take me too seriously. The only person that doesn't hate Froome.
Gramz
Failed Custom Bike

Tillquist
Posts: 1593
Joined: Fri Dec 30, 2005 3:33 pm
Contact:

by Tillquist

The name Off the frame is: TMR01
See all my bike h e r e

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

by djconnel

Scott seems to be willing to tolerate a lot of frame failures, as does Cervelo. Each of these companies has been on the cutting edge of light. Really for most applications throwing an extra 100 grams at reliability makes enormous sense.

I cringe every time I see a Cannondale EVO covered in opaque white & light green paint, as I did today. But obviously I'm atypical. Most people really don't care about 100 grams.

User avatar
53x12
Posts: 3762
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2006 6:02 am
Location: On the bike

by 53x12

"I cringe every time I see a Cannondale EVO covered in opaque white & light green paint, as I did today. But obviously I'm atypical. Most people really don't care about 100 grams."

I know you know this, but those of us who are WW are a special and unique bunch. While we might care about the last 5-10g, the average person would laugh at a 100g difference. Go to any of the other major cycling forums and they will laugh and tell you to take a crap before the ride and how that is much cheaper. While I agree that if I got the Evo I would want the Ultimate frame version, some people care about the appearance of their bike more than the weight. Hence why some might want the Team version of the frame. To each his own.
"Marginal gains are the only gains when all that's left to gain is in the margins."

theloper
Posts: 140
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 10:02 pm
Location: florida

by theloper

The pics of the bike is Hincapie's ride. And he rides I guessing a 58 cm? Pretty minimal amount of post showing for a build that tall. A 51 cm must look a bit strange. Think it would look much better with a sloping top tube. I have been told by a dealer that they will be hitting shops by the 2nd week of July and have a big price tag.

Also.....I hope the brakes are better than the ones on the TM01....those things are horrible.

User avatar
53x12
Posts: 3762
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2006 6:02 am
Location: On the bike

by 53x12

^ Any idea how big the "big price tag" is?
"Marginal gains are the only gains when all that's left to gain is in the margins."

cyclenutnz
Posts: 764
Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2006 5:18 am
Location: Cambridge, New Zealand
Contact:

by cyclenutnz

theloper wrote:Also.....I hope the brakes are better than the ones on the TM01....those things are horrible.


Horrible to work on or horrible function? One of my athletes is considering one and I'm leery of putting her on a bike where I don't know if the brakes will work.
http://www.speedtheory.co.nz
http://www.velogicfit.com - 3D Motion Capture and Frame Finder Software

StoneRoses
Posts: 4
Joined: Mon May 28, 2012 10:53 am

by StoneRoses

I think they convinced the UCI that the whole thing is part of the front brake.
It look very similar to Speed Concept 9 brake.

jooo
Posts: 1510
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2011 3:48 am

by jooo

nigel379 wrote:You can see in a few pics that it can't be BB30 bc it is using a Shimano crank w/o an adapter. Disappointing.

BMC recently seem to be doing a bunch of 'team' frames which have been BB86 regardless of what the production version is. The team is on Shimano so when you can have them made to suit, why use an adaptor? I wouldn't be surprised if the production version is PF30.

53x12 wrote:The BMC Team Maching SLR01 (their "lightweight frame" hit 920g in a 53cm. I can see this frame hitting under 1000g, but I don't think you will see hit 900g even.

I don't think it's that far fetched, their new 29er HT weighs under 1000 grams. I guess part of the question is what do you call frame weight now with more and more things being integrated?

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post