Team Cervélo, Zipp, Speedplay, Vittoria and 3T!

by Tiki on Sep 7, 2008 9:40 AM EDT

Wow, I haven't been following cycling closely enough. These allstar manufacturers are making their own team, and presumably retiring from sponsoring other teams (Cervelo definitely is). I have never seen an array of sponsors that ever appeared to offer a genuine technological advantage before. But Cervelo & Zipp & Speedplay?

Does anybody else think that you could actually gain a minor technological edge in cycling? In other words, could you actually scrub a couple seconds off by using Cervelo over Speedplay, Zipp over Dura Ace (defiinitely, I think), Speedplay over anything? (I mean, everybody knows that there's a great advantage to using Shimano instead of Campy... that's just common knowledge, but I'm talking about an actual debate over things that are still up in the air).

Tweet Comment 5 comments | 1 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Oops, I meant...

Cervelo over Specialized.

by Tiki on Sep 7, 2008 9:43 AM EDT reply actions

Anyone using a new 3TTT stem

and/or bar? I have on older Less XL bar and stem on my Pinarello. It’s extremely stiff, however the 2-bolt carbon face plate has slipped a couple times on me. Their new stuff is 4-bolt which I prefer (like my Ritchey stuff that never slips but isn’t quite as stiff as the 3TTT).

Tiki, I will try and ignore your attempts at Campy baiting, but I will say this. Having just shelled out $25 for a chainring nut and bolt for my stupid Record carbon cranks, I’m ripe for the conversion. I will also say that if all my bikes were destroyed in a termite related basement cave-in, and I had to start from scratch, I would probably go with Dura Ace 7900. Very sweet and they finally buried the cables.
I think there is an advantage to to more aero wheels in certain applications (not so much a crit, but a road race and definitely a TT). I have really only used Speedplays since I’ve had a racing license and I have never worried about pre-releasing or bottoming out. The binding mechanism can be a tad fussy, but I love the float and clearance. On frames; there seems to be a trend toward more aero road frames, and I can see where a better air flow over the rear wheel can save some watts.

by Peter Fontecchio on Sep 7, 2008 12:08 PM EDT reply actions

poor pitiful me

has to road-test a set of zipp vuma cranks w/ceramic bb. . .

I’ve seen some grousing about them on some forums, but the ones I’m riding . . . well, I ain’t in a hurry to give ’em back.

And . . . don’t forget sram. nice stuff. And that red cassette . . .

by R Mc on Sep 7, 2008 8:18 PM EDT up reply actions

In reality

I’d say riders feel comfortable on some bikes and not others, but I doubt that among the various machines used at the top level that some guys are getting a time bonus over others.

p.s. Ni hao Tiki!

"If writing too much about the Classics is wrong, I don't want to be right."

by Chris Fontecchio on Sep 7, 2008 12:25 PM EDT reply actions

I think the aero component of all frames/component/wheels and wheel weight are the only

real places that can make a slight difference currently. Given the UCI weight limit and the fact that carbon is used almost exclusively, power transfer is fairly close for all pro tour level frames.

Sastre won the tour riding D/A7800 and a crank that is nowhere near as stiff as Campy/Shim/Red and that seemed to serve him just fine.

Like the old guy on 22lb steel with friction shifters that shows up to a ride and kicks everyones ass – its the engine that counts. The last time I heard of anyone losing a TT because of inferior position or lack of aero-ness was fignon in ’89.

by humbug1 on Sep 8, 2008 10:39 AM EDT reply actions