Techs-Mechs: UCI Dings Contador's Crono Rig

“…and Cervelo’s piece de resistance, the P4. A culmination of three years of aero design, wind tunnel testing and expensive R&D. No wonder they are now "quite concerned." Unless my interpretation of the UCI rules is way off, there’s no possible way this falls within the guidelines. It is pretty bad ass, though.”

http://www.bikerumor.com/2009/05/06/uci-could-deal-crushing-blow-to-bicycle-manufacturers/

“Astana had earlier proposed to the UCI that it be allowed to race the bike without the nosecone section while a more permanent solution was developed, but in light of this latest development, the team has now had to scramble with seven older-technology Transition framesets reportedly arriving at the team hotel earlier today – and all eight of them must be built, sized, tuned and fully race-ready by Sunday.”

Guess the UCI can see beyond the gismo and what it is really for. It doesn’t provide any functional/support/integrity. Just for aero.

Astana suggested that they be able to remove the “nose cone” to meet regs. That somewhat makes UCIs point, don’t you think?

It’s not structural, it’s not a fixed element.

“The Shiv aerobar is fully integrated with the frame and fork. The internal shift and brake cable exits cleanly out the back of the basebar and ports back into the frame at the front of the top tube. The aerobar was re-designed four times, twice per UCI’s new 3:1 basebar aspect regulations. "We said it’s absolutely gotta be one of the strongest bars out there," Cote said.

The basebar is fixed to the nose cone, which is effectively the stem. The fork flares from a 1" to 1 1/8" headset bearings top to bottom, for increased frontal stiffness. We will get to fit later, as it relates more globally to frame fit.

The way the brakes are affixed is truly unique; the cyclo-cross style brake on the front extends down the stem, and is actually set at caliper level onto a "strap" that affixes to fork crown for greater stiffness. The bosses are reverse-facing, with two 6mm bolts that thread into an insert extending from the fork crown. Therefore, the brakes mount not to the fork, but rather the stem, in a backward-facing fashion. It’s fairly wide in order to house the brake setup, but the design effectively made for a longer airfoil section, resulting, Specialized says, in a smaller wake than the narrowest leading-edge headtubes." – Inside Triathlon

“One of Specialized’s two main objectives when designing the Shiv was to make it the most aerodynamic time trial bike in the world. In order to achieve this Specialized had to rethink the leading edge of the bike, the aerobars and placement of the front brake. Specialized’s solution was to develop an integrated stem and aerobar setup in which the front brake mounts rearward into the stem instead of the fork crown. While externally the stem appears to be little more than a carbon fairing running the height of the steer tube, it is actually a key structural element. The top and bottom of the stem feature internal aluminum supports. The top aluminum piece supports the integrated carbon fiber aerobars and mounts to the carbon fiber steer tube that tapers from 1-inch at the top to 1.125-inch at the fork crown. The bottom aluminum piece supports the rear mounted front brake and serves as a secondary attachment point to the fork via a carbon fiber bridge that mounts to the stem and underside of the fork. All of this creates a very smooth and integrated leading edge that also hides the front brake.” – Road Bike Action

“The Shiv’s huge front section complies to the UCI 3:1 ratio rule as it is classed as structural. The intergrated section makes up the stem, head tube and front brake attachment. The tri bars and extension are aslo integrated into the stem.” Cycling Weekly

“That ties the whole structure together with the top and bottom of the steering tube and makes it very stiff. Bolting the carbon plate underneath also increases the stiffness of the tiny cantilever brake hidden inside the nose cone, whose pivot bosses are part of the nose cone, not the fork. The brake has a stiffening arch within the nose cone and is tied rigidly to both the handlebar and the fork, thus transferring the braking force directly into the bike.” Velonews

. . . just like the Fork, Headset, Stem, and Brake are, then you can better appreciate just how much Chris, and the rest of the Specialized R&D team started designing this bike outside the normal parameters most people utilize.

There is so much going on in this design beyond the “cool” factor which required a significant amount of components specifically engineered and integrated into this one frame.

With regards to the removal of this component, I think you are misunderstanding the reality of things.
What Specialized is probably saying is more of a theoretical removal, which will require a significant amount of redesign and new components manufactured specifically for this frameset.
We’re not talking about showing up to the first TT of the season and clipping off some zip ties holding on the wheel covers that shroud the spokes of your wheel which have created a Pho-Disk, or going to a bike shop an purchasing some new Aerobars because the base bar is not compliant with the 3:1 rule.
 
I’m not exactly sure, because I do not completely understand entirely what this decision impacts regarding this design, but the removal/redesign process will easily cost over a half million USD.