But you do see why I referenced eric. if eric irks you with his denigration of this board..you do see you are no better...right? You did the same thing unprovoked...why I exorted you to take the high road. Teachers teach in spite of haters which is just background music based upon ignorance. Teaching not only enlightens but gives the teacher satisfaction in knowing he has at least tried to make a difference. Also, in my experience, teaching helps the teacher. Ideas are many times debated and in the end, truth is undeniable and both teachers and students learn in the process. So, if you have something to share, I implore you to share it.

For example, I would like to discuss how common tooling is combined. Commonized aka minimized number of carbon molds is most cost effective.
Of course a primary reason for slanted top tube bikes is minimize stand over and reduce no. of molds. What differentiates bike sizes mostly...is the front and not rear triangle of the bike. In the case of Cervelo, all Cervelo's even share the same sta. This makes all rear triangles the same...at least for a given frame model. So the challenge there is to graft a common rear triangle made in the same mold onto a different front end. Front triangles vary in terms of top tube, head tube and down tube length. In the case of Specialized for example...beginning with SL3 models a couple of years ago, Specialized molded their front triangles as one piece to increase rigidity. Again, this begs the issue, how the two halves are joined...is BB shared and located in position relative to rear triangle initalially or front triangle? How is lay up preformed to ensure adequate connection between the two halves? Answers to these questions are unknowable by the public but someone with a lot of experience with carbon fiber can speculate at least on how the lay up is performed..or how they would do it.