Bike porn

And how stiff does a frame need to be? You don't hear a lot of complaints from 595 owners, even though it seems to be a noodle in that test.

Scapin Etika

french touch

^ probably a good bike but far from making me smile

I came here for porn and all I found was wind

A bit of porn then!

the zipp bars look cool

And how stiff does a frame need to be? You don't hear a lot of complaints from 595 owners, even though it seems to be a noodle in that test.

What you can feel is irrelevant. You can measure stuff that's way below the perception limit of even an experienced cyclist.

.

retreats to safe distance

^^Is that the Tour article that showed the SS Evo to be a bit unstiff (relatively) compared to the competition, including the Cervelo and the boggo SuperSix?

Edit: It was a Giant test. Cervelo say the RCA is as stiff as the R5Ca, but how does the California compare to the Regular R5 and the R5 VWD?

I wouldn't read too much into the fabled Tour tests. I know one large manufacturer used to (and probably still does) make 'specials' especially for the test. I'm guessing that if they're at it then so are probablty most of the rest.

front clearence is 3mm, it's enough

Tour are a bit obsessed with frame/fork stiffness. And the German brands always do remarkably well in their tests…

Touring tyres on a track bike >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

this bike is for street riding, not track, so pasela tires it's really ok

this bike is for riding to the café, not track, so pasela tires it's really ok

So much money and nice stuff and the two browns don't match at all.

So much money and nice stuff and the two browns don't match at all.

thank's for compliment about nice stuff for this forum is more than enough

R5ca is a freds frame? If you could afford a frame of that kind of money and were in to cycling It would be a good frame to consider rather than buying a rather heavy dogma or c59 because they are steeped in italian heritage rather than actual engineering and R&D.

The RCA is very pricey but offsets the initial cost for a small company. Look forward to the production version (R7?).

[/QUOTE]I've witnessed someone buying one of those (previous model) and I can assure you that said bike was not bought to be ridden. If you have that sort of money AND you're into your cycling you'll most likely buy/ride something else.[/QUOTE]

So much money and nice stuff shame the brown doesn't work at all.

ftfy

Black saddle, straps and bar tape would be a massive improvement!

Can see the argument for Paselas and I've got a pair waiting at work for my Pre Cursa but the tread does look shit. Shame there's not a better alternative on the market coz gumwalls are the lick!!!!

ftfy

Black saddle, straps and bar tape would be a massive improvement!

Can see the argument for Paselas and I've got a pair waiting at work for my Pre Cursa but the tread does look shit. Shame there's not a better alternative on the market coz gumwalls are the lick!!!!

Black saddle etc it's just matter of taste. There is tons of red Colnago's with this black equipment, boring.

About pasela you are completely right

R5ca is a freds frame? If you could afford a frame of that kind of money and were in to cycling It would be a good frame to consider

Q.E.D. "Fred Frames" are not frames that are bad but enable a kind of conspicuous luxury.

rather than buying a rather heavy dogma or c59 because they are steeped in italian heritage rather than actual engineering and R&D.

The Pinarello Dogma and Colnago C59 are "steeped" in about as much "engineering and R&D" as the Cervelo. Freds love these too..

The RCA is very pricey but offsets the initial cost for a small company. Look forward to the production version (R7?).

Cervelo is currently the biggest selling time and tria brand. Cervelo is these days owned by Pon. 13000 employees in 23 countries is not what I'd call "small".

The RCA is NOT about racing. Its about making a point. With current UCI weight limits there is little point to sub-Kg frames.

You could make a case for ballast- 2kg of steel pellets in the seat-tube above the BB would move the CoG down a bit, possibly aiding cornering.

A bit.

^^The UCI were considering waving the weight limit in 2012 as long as there was sufficient testing for safety, and what with everyone's overwhelming fear of carbon fibre imploding underneath them, I can't imagine it's something that will go away soon

retreats to safe distance

You seem confused. Just because you can measure that one frame is 50% stiffer than another, it doesn't mean it will make any difference to performance. Sometimes you can add so much stiffness that even a human being can feel it, but it still makes no measurable difference to the performance. On the other hand, just because you can't feel the difference between a Zipp 808 and an 808 Firecrest, it doesn't mean that there isn't a real measurable difference between them which can make a material difference to your cycling performance.

This failure to distinguish between parameters which are easily measured and parameters which are important to cycling performance has kept the weightweenies forum busy all these years.

OK I see. I thought you were saying that you wouldn't be able to feel the increased stiffness, therefore it wouldn't be faster, which is clearly not true. Shouldn't have doubted you...

^^The UCI were considering waving the weight limit in 2012 as long as there was sufficient testing for safety, and what with everyone's overwhelming fear of carbon fibre imploding underneath them, I can't imagine it's something that will go away soon

Its not really the issue but a fear of failure is quite justified... Failure, some quite catastrophic is hardly unhead of in the peleton.. There is a whole lot of "stupid light" out there (not that it started with carbon fibre)....
"Sufficient testing for safety"? The UCI know full well that it can't. They can --- as with wheels--- just test for impact failure. Fatigue and failure modus is, however, more complex and beyond the political means of a sport highly dependent upon bicycle vendor sponsorship.