2020 Aethos Sub UCI weight Specialized.

[Knightyboy27]

Thought I'd start a new thread for peoples thoughts/rumours

[adilosnave]

Probably an e-bike, fat tire, gravel recumbent.

[dolophonic]

WEIGHT ...

[dolophonic]

it will be crazy light ..

[FlatlandClimber]

Probably an e-bike, fat tire, gravel recumbent.

6.79kg Unicycle is my bet.

[sychen]

1x weight weenie special Hill climb specialist bike with aero consideration... Sub 5kg out of the box... $20k with sub 1kg wheelset, unpadded carbon saddle, no bottle cage mounts.



Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

[FactoryMatt]

Cyclingtips sl7 podcast is interesting. The spesh engineers are mum on it. They know something.

[MyM3Coupe]

You left out another piece of crap Asian open mold frame with dropped seat stays. I'm in such suspense. Lolz

[Knightyboy27]

Cyclingtips sl7 podcast is interesting. The spesh engineers are mum on it. They know something.

I'll take a listen later, but there's an interesting quote in the Cyclingtips review of the SL7

“So currently the Venge in our line right now does not meet much of a need for that rider looking for the performance product.”

Sounds like they've left an opening for something new, and the author even mentions that in their final thoughts.

[madik]

Does it make sense to change the geometry of the bike that would be otherwice not possible under UCI rules? I can think mostly about seat tube angle which could be higher and therefor move the seat horizontaly closer to BB. In many cases its favorable to move the seatpost more forward as it opens the hip angle and allow more agressive position on the bike but the current geometries prevents it due to rules about minimal seat setback from BB. If the seat tube angle would be changed it would require other changes, longer reach and perhaps even lower stack of the frame.

[Knightyboy27]

Does it make sense to change the geometry of the bike that would be otherwice not possible under UCI rules? I can think mostly about seat tube angle which could be higher and therefor move the seat horizontaly closer to BB. In many cases its favorable to move the seatpost more forward as it opens the hip angle and allow more agressive position on the bike but the current geometries prevents it due to rules about minimal seat setback from BB. If the seat tube angle would be changed it would require other changes, longer reach and perhaps even lower stack of the frame.

That just ends up being a TT bike with dropbars on though...

I'm thinking more like some extreme frame design like the Hope track bike forks matched with a sort of Cervelo P3X frame, maybe some fairings to cover the discs etc.

Some wild Frankenbike

[KyleH]

That just ends up being a TT bike with dropbars on though...

I'm thinking more like some extreme frame design like the Hope track bike forks matched with a sort of Cervelo P3X frame, maybe some fairings to cover the discs etc.

Some wild Frankenbike

Yeah but 2 years ago they announced their UCI illegal Shiv tri bike. I don't see beam bikes catching on in the road segment and it seems so soon yet to replace the Shiv.

[madik]

Does it make sense to change the geometry of the bike that would be otherwice not possible under UCI rules? I can think mostly about seat tube angle which could be higher and therefor move the seat horizontaly closer to BB. In many cases its favorable to move the seatpost more forward as it opens the hip angle and allow more agressive position on the bike but the current geometries prevents it due to rules about minimal seat setback from BB. If the seat tube angle would be changed it would require other changes, longer reach and perhaps even lower stack of the frame.

That just ends up being a TT bike with dropbars on though...

I'm thinking more like some extreme frame design like the Hope track bike forks matched with a sort of Cervelo P3X frame, maybe some fairings to cover the discs etc.

Some wild Frankenbike

Sure it will be closer to a TT bike but the change does not have to be big. Just a small move of the saddle is opening the hip angle quite a bit. But since most of the drag is from the rider then it makes sense to move the rider more forward and lower to improve the overall drag and allow more power to the pedals. Position on the bike also have to be sunstainable and the rear/front weight balance can't change by a huge margin. So I would think the seat tube angle could change lets say from 73.5 (56 Venge) to 74,5 or something similar and keep some seatpost offset to increase compliancy.

[robeambro]

Cyclingtips sl7 podcast is interesting. The spesh engineers are mum on it. They know something.

I'll take a listen later, but there's an interesting quote in the Cyclingtips review of the SL7

“So currently the Venge in our line right now does not meet much of a need for that rider looking for the performance product.”

Sounds like they've left an opening for something new, and the author even mentions that in their final thoughts.

What a pile of turd.. Doesn't meet the needs.. It's basically the same bike with 100g more weight and an inch more aero. What a bunch of marketing clowns.

[Nefarious86]

You left out another piece of crap Asian open mold frame with dropped seat stays. I'm in such suspense. Lolz

So edgy ....

Sent from my SM-N976B using Tapatalk