Bike porn

does something automatically qualify because it says colnago on the side? because I think that's rather boring/ugly/standard :(

but if it does it for you, there's a lugged carbon c40 with an identical paintjob on ebay right now

Yes.

Next question please.

In all seriousness, obviously not. And if there was a default rule imo it would probably be all colnagos are anti, rather than porn.

I just really liked the image as a whole. And perhaps more importantly, the sooner we can get to the next page the better ;)

r e p o s t s

Proof that Cinelli have been making fugly bikes for many, many years!

Too much jibba jabba on here...
http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t246/londonbabe_photo/IMG_1431.jpg

forget the parts, but the frame is porn, especially all the details, which you can see in the rest of the set here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/colossi/sets/72157627705021639

I love frames like this and the undoubtedly repost Cinetica, pretty much set the design blueprint for a lot of today's frames

you guys are all ridiculous.

...

Colossi looks like a melted Laser.

Bizarre crank choice on the Yamaguchi.

and wheel, bar, tyre, saddle and seatpost choice!

The whole build is bizarre....

.... and is in the wrong thread. cheers guys, another page where I had to scroll up and check which thread I was reading....

I must point out that they are run on open highways adjacent to lorries, buses, and high speed traffic at (essentially) sea level. Boardman's cadence was estimated at 120rpm, so I must conclude that both he and Alex W. were aided to a degree by traffic flow.

1: Sea level is a hindrance, not a help. TTing in Colorado should always be faster than doing it anywhere in the UK

2: What has cadence got to do with it? Boardman's average cadence was about 104 IIRC, but irrelevant to the question of traffic assistance; he chose the gear with a pretty good idea of what time he was going for, and as Olympic pursuit champion I doubt that he was bothered by what would be, for most of us, a bit spinny.

3: Boardman's 25 record on the A34 was undoubtedly traffic assisted, it was done in the days before traffic counts, and that course has effectively been banned due to high traffic volumes. Don't let that distract you from Alex Dowsett's 1min+ beating of your domestic record, though. On the A31, most pictures shot from the roadside don't contain any motor vehicles, and the few that do go past are therefore gone before you can pick up any kind of a tow, due to both the large speed differential and the fact that they all have space to pass wide, unlike the slowed double streams from the "good old days". I get more traffic pull on our local single carriageway. And did you look at the elevation profile? It's nowhere near flat.

All of which is a bit of a distraction from the main point; is your Drillium technology a work of genius which has been foolishly overlooked by the big guys, or is it a silly gimmick which, at best, achieves gains in stiffness and aerodynamic drag which could be more easily got by simply narrowing the tubes and increasing the wall thickness?

We know that the records set on these frames are nothing special, and that frames make only marginal differences in time trials anyway, so it's safe to completely disregard your manufacturing palmares as giving no useful data to illuminate the question.

That being the case, we need to see numbers; either proper wind tunnel/load cell tests which show clear improvements, or at the very least some credible mathematical modelling indicating the potential gains. The logical end point of your down tube drilling would be completely to replace the tube with this

all but eliminating frontal area at the expense of a huge increase in skin friction, but the success of the [ame]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grid_fin[/ame] tells us that small deviations of flow away from precise alignment with the flat surfaces generate nice big aerodynamic loads, and the same would surely be the case as soon as your sleeves saw any non-zero yaw angle, i.e. exactly the conditions applying to pretty much all outdoor cycling.

Calling in aid the slotted Oval Jetsteam forks is also a distraction; the overall section, proportional length of the slots and direction relative to the vehicle axis are all so different that any benefit attributable to the long, angled slots in an aerofoil section fork blade are utterly irrelevant to circular, straight on, multiple sleeves punched through a round or oval fork blade.

Of course, the one thing we know about aerodynamics is that even the most educated guess is often utterly wrong, since nobody can fully visualise airflow and it's the little things which turn out to be big. So, if you can prove by experiment that you really have spotted a solution to which the rest of us have been blind, well done, but if it came down to a sportsman like 'chips down' situation, I'd place my bet on your design actually being worse than a plain circular section tube of the same material, outside diameter and weight in both aerodynamic drag across the typical yaw angle distribution seen in actual races, and in the torsional stiffness which is the main function of a down tube.

Awful page.

Post some porn, 5 pics gets us to the next page

cmon, just a small push...

...and breathe