UCI set to scrap '3:1 rule' limiting aero race bike design - Cycling Weekly

So 3:1 rule going out the window...

ayfkm. I just got a uci-legal speed concept in case they ever decided to start testing **** at nats.

It makes sense to scrap it; the rule was holding back progress. Of course this means manufacturers coming out with ugly bikes.

I'm kind of excited by this 3:1 removal. AFAIK the double triangle rule remains. So bikes will look largely the same, just with thinner stays, forks, etc.

I should note that didn't they report the 15lb rule was "set to be scrapped" too? Wasn't that like 3 years ago?

I'll believe it when I hear it from the UCI. So far it's just someone at the industry group WFSGI saying the UCI has told them this. Maybe that's because it's happening, or maybe it's because they're trying to put some pressure on the UCI. This is only in Cycling Weekly so far, not widely reported yet. But pretty darn interesting if it turns out to be true.

UCI to continue disc brakes ban in road racing | Cyclingnews.com

see bottom of article for quote from the UCI concerning the above.

fwiw, a bunch of manufacturers (eg specialized) came up with non-UCI-legal bikes (see: Shiv Tri).

ya know what? the aerodynamics come out similar to the UCI-legal version -- slightly better at high yaw, which us TTers hope never to see!

we'll see what happens.

some manufacturers went back to the beam stuff (which has its own problems); there hasn't been independent validation of just how aero these are relative to the top UCI-legal frames...at least not from what i've seen over the years.

Yeah, but those non-UCI-legal bikes (see: Shiv Tri) are super ugly.

There's Ventum which I actually kinda like and dimond which is hideous. There are rumors on ST that Cervelo is coming out with a Dimond type beam bike. If you believe the testing both are faster at almost all yaws than any UCI legal bike.

Of course, we don't know if eliminating the 3:1 rule is going to allow these bikes; technically it doesn't. I believe they still require the standard geometry (2 tubes to the fork). I believe it should; we're well past the point that we need to rely on the that design for safety reasons.

This decision came at a really good / interesting time for me. I was finally playing around with the idea of getting a TT bike and my sponsor shop carries Felt. I was about to pull the trigger on a DA frameset but it looks like the Felt IA might be legal? (I want to entertain the thoughts of Nats at some point). Any thoughts on those?

My thoughts are, it's a great bike, but I'm biased.

Go read up on the Slowtwitch forums if you're interested they have a ton of info on it. If you google the windtunnel data it looks fast (according to their tests, funny how that works). My guess is its a solid bike.

I have an opportunity to buy some take-off Roval CLX 60 clinchers with the carrying case and accouterments for $1000. Seems like a decent deal, but I'm having difficulty finding reviews or wind data.

Anyone used these wheels and have an opinion?

^ Paging [MENTION=360087]dz_nuzz[/MENTION]

Those are top shelf wheels. I would buy them at that price without a second thought.

sounds good. I'm in a money-spending mood anyhow.

I used these wheels for a while. I don't have any hard data to show you though. They are probably the lightest Clincher 60mm rims out there, braking is really good even in the wet. They held up really well for me over 2 years of racing and have now been passed along to a teammate who is enjoying them.

Biggest drawback is the fact that they use straight-pull non-flattened spokes with internal spoke nipples. This makes truing them a complete PITA. Luckily they never really seemed to go out of true aside from the initial break-in period.

that's a solid price.

they don't have the aerodynamics of the clx64s, fwiw, but you'd be hard-pressed to find those for anywhere near that price.

i personally dislike wheels with internal nipples, but a clincher for road riding is not that big a deal.

I finally hit "too big" in road tires. I had been running 700x24 S-Works tubeless on Hed Ardennes+ wheels, and those tires measured about 27mm wide and felt fine. I messed up the front one and didn't have a replacement, so I put on a set of 700x25 Michelin Pro4 Endurance tires (with tubes) that had been on other wheels. Those suckers measure 30mm wide on the Hed wheels. They just felt so...slow. Adding insult to injury, I broke a spoke yesterday and while opening the brake kept the rim free of the brake pads, the bleepin' tire rubbed the inside of the chainstay. They're off the bike now, replaced by 700x24 S-Works clinchers that measure about 26.4mm wide now and will probably stretch a bit more. Working in a Specialized LBS has its perks. ;)

I'm fully prepared to believe that this is all in my head, but there it is.

I'm also glad they announced the 3:1 rule drop since I was saving to get the mrs a more aero frame. Now we can wait and see what ridiculousness comes out.

Cervélo launches radical new P5X bike - Cycling Weekly

kill me

https://keyassets.timeincuk.net/insp...de-630x420.jpg

soft ride?? omfg why

ugh. i thought cervelo had taste.

As someone pointed out elsewhere, Cervelo's first bike looked very much like this one. Green bike in this article: Cervelo C3 Review | CycleFit

'when we are tired, we are attacked by ideas conquered long ago.' / nietzsche