|Bucking Trends or Creating Problems...||Akirasho|
Dec 23, 2001 12:45 AM
|... just popped over to Cervelo's website... as I await news on their '02 product line and espied this...
They're previewing their '02 P3 which is reported to sport their own 1" integrated headset...
Given recent reports of a new 1.5 standard for MTB's in the comming years, I wonder what folks think of this (albeit from a small player) added spoon in the pot (no word on who makes the headset for them).
Their quick preview states aerodynamic reasons for remaining with the 1" headtube (Cervelo's forte)... also note that Litespeed has ditched the "nosecone" on their current Blade model (though they use a 1 1/8" headtube) so they're might be tangible reasons for the smaller...
How much would you be willing to pay/sacrifice for proprietary systems regardless of maker, for weight savings, aerodynamics, stiffness, compliance, etc.
While replacing and swapping parts are a small facet for many of us, do the majority of readers on this forum really care about long term compatibility issues (at least for durable goods such as forks, seatposts, etc)... do you upgrade the frame (or complete bike) long before the components have reached the limit of their lifespans (how old is your current principle ride and if relatively new, why did you buy it)?
Remain In Light.
|I see no good||McAndrus|
Dec 23, 2001 5:37 AM
|I see no good in proprietary components and integrated headsets in particular. I hope the headsets are a fad but I fear they are not.|
|A mixed bag at best||Kerry Irons|
Dec 23, 2001 7:51 AM
|Generally, proprietary systems suck. Especially when there is no alternative. When Look pedals first came out, they were considered proprietary, because most shoes couldn't be used with them - nobody had the three bolt pattern. However, you always had an alternative of putting different pedals on the bike. If things didn't work out, you weren't left high and dry, though you risked blowing a bunch of cash. With the integrated HS, you do run that risk, because your frame can become obsolete. Same with frames that use press-fit proprietary BBs (older Kleins?).
On one hand, some proprietary things have become new standards and resulted in improvements. OTOH, most have been dead ends and (un)planned obsolescence. History teaches that it is always wise to wait a few years for things to sort out before embracing the "new standard" for bike parts. That is, if you care about being able to keep a bike running for more than a few years.
|I see no good||Jon|
Dec 23, 2001 11:02 AM
|This is an old, old marketing tactic, and I don't like it. So how much faster will |
the bike go, .0001 mph with a tailwind?
Dec 23, 2001 7:50 AM
|In most cases, I'm opposed to all things proprietary. But in the case of that particular bike from Cervelo, my expectation is that Cervelo has done everything within their power and UCI regulations to make the P3 as aero as possible. If that means they want to use a proprietary fork/headset, I'm o.k. with it. This bike is purpose built- and it is built with the expectation that it is among the best.|
|re: Bucking Trends or Creating Problems...||loop|
Dec 23, 2001 7:58 AM
Do you think that there REALLY will be long term supply problems with intergrated HS's? People, particularly the 'zines, like to talk that up, but it would seem that there are enough bikes specing them that there will be no shortage. Of course, if head tubes begin to structurally fail, that will be a different story.
Nonetheless, if Cane Creek (hate 'em or love 'em) and Campy make the derned things, it stands to reason that other HS manufacturers won't be far behind. To play devil's advocate yet again, however, Shimano still has yet to make a threadless one themselves.... ;-)
I'll be curious to see who makes the one Cervelo is specing and how many other bikes they put it on. If memory serves, they weren't excatly specing high end stuff on their '01 line--Dia Comp, yes?
Finally, I still don't see what was wrong with normal HS's. They don't make a substantial aerodynamic difference to normal mortals (so sayeth John Cobb), and they offer the opportunity to add personalized flair to one's bike.
Enjoy a safe holdiay season and ride fast.
PS--Forget LS's Blade...take a look at their new Saber and tell us how much that beauty is gonna cost!
|re: more a "question" of availability...||Akirasho|
Dec 23, 2001 9:19 AM
|... just showing my age a bit...
New "standards" and "systems" will be available enough... it's just the thought and idea that I'd have to "special" order a replacement... rather than just flipping through a catalog (depending on how this finally shakes out, how many LBS would be willing to inventory varied systems or systems outside their marques?)... and that's kinda ironic since I own two 'Dales with headshocks ("When I was a kid, we didn't have no clipless pedals... we nailed our feet directly to the spindles... and we liked it" kinda thing)!
Markets are constantly being pushed (my company's motto is "Continuous Improvement" which suggests that we didn't do it right the first time...) and I'm of an age where I resist (just a little) new things (the thought that ANYONE could consider MP3 a viable alternative in home audio (or dolby's new "10%" scheme) makes me cringe). I'm inconsistent in these matters and not suggesting that folks don't want or even need innovations and change (I was the first kid on my block with a CF fork and Ultegra 9)... just curious how others felt (I think my bike fetish has been well documented on this forum and others).
... and since you mentioned it, I'm guessing that Cervelo spec's it's frames thusly to remain competitive... my P2K has been "upgraded" from it's "as advertized" form (one of the first things to go were the brakes and levers (substituted for Ultegra and Syntace Space Controls... jes becuz)) because the frame is sooooo bitchin'. These specs' allow folks to buy a race ready rig and add eye candy later (and I've never seen a P2K or P3 without added chi chis) when the budget allows. As I've stated before (and many of you echo), I'll go with a killer frame and skimp on components any day.
And, you got me to roll over to Litespeed's site... first visit since they've added their Al models... I'd like to try some... Alas, I can see that the Blade will probably see CF stays in the near future... yep, the Sabre looks sweet (another bike I'd like to try).
Lastly, like some have already alluded to, many of the things we enjoy today as being de rigueur were once bleeding edge or fringe... gaining widespread acceptance over the years. Time will tell I guess.
Remain In Light.
|Just a thought...||loop|
Dec 23, 2001 11:32 AM
|...DVD movies converted to an MP3 format that you can easily store on you 40 gig harddrive and call up whenever you want to watch them. Of course, that suggests that your computer is wired into your home entertainment center, and, naturally, the interface is a red-lense that calmly asks "What are you doing, Dave?"...
I've yet to see the integrated HSs offered in Colo. Cyclist, Excel, Pricepoint or Perf. I have, however, found them offered via a number of mail order/internet retailers. I think that the technology will evolve and like it or not will be here to stay, although I doubt they will fully replace standard head sets.
As far as Cervelo goes, please don't misunderstand me. I hold them in very high regards indeed both for keen engineering and astute marketing. Before I bought my new Dean, their Prodigy made my short list, and I was planning the first round of auto-upgrades. Their technique is nothing new, although I think their method is better than most other companies. 'Dale has CODA, Specialized has S-Works, and Trek has(d) ICON. I think, however, that Cervelo does a better job specing the heart of the bike's components with one solid line (Ultegra, DA, whatever), using high quality cockpit comps like Ritchey, and then cutting overhead costs with "lesser" components like their brakes and head sets. Sorry if I offended anyone with those comments. For the record, I currently own a Spec. mtn. bike with lots of S-Works goodies, and my first tri bike was a 94 'Dale R700 with a mix of Ultegra 8 and 105. Been there, done that, got the t-shirt.
In any case, whereas the UCI fears change and needs to be institutionally put on lithium, I find the new technologies intriguing. Half the fun is figuring out what has actual performance benefit, what is simply eye candy, what is quality, and what is crap. Yup...it's a fetish alright!
I'll be very curious to hear from anyone who buys/rides one of LS's new aluminum frames. People are all abuzz with the Ghisallo, but I want to hear from the folks who get to spin on the new al's or the new Saber. Now the fun part is going to be deciding upon the Saber or the Yaqui Carbo for my next tri rig.