Holy Shiv! Specialized bike is now illegal?

[ImmaculateKadence]

It does appear to be a slightly different frame style, but that nosecone is still present. Link

I would love to hear what Saxo is doing in response. So far all I've read about is Astana's response. I'm assuming Saxo will ride the Transition as well?

 

[ravens]

They made an adjustment to the bike to get UCI to give them a pass at the Tour. The UCI has now said that the adjustment is not allowed either. They knew it was coming, but that they thought, like all previous years, they had until July to have the new prototype available. The UCI's decision was unexpected.

So it's the same bike that Saxo Bank used at the Tour that was just banned.

As I've said before, the governing bodies and team managemnt of the sport often appears to be 1 part brothel/1 part 3 ring circus/1 part 3 card monte/1 part halfway house.

This MID RACE 3 card monte decision, in the words of eminent philosopher and philanthropist Cosmo Kramer, seems 'capricious and arbitrary'.

I could understand them saying at the end of last season, in 60 days, the Shiv is out, or them saying today that the bike is not legit 60 days from now, but this kind of idiocy just elevates professional wrestling to near-respectability.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HGKh4pTCDcg

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

As I've said before, the governing bodies and team managemnt of the sport often appears to be 1 part brothel/1 part 3 ring circus/1 part 3 card monte/1 part halfway house.

This MID RACE 3 card monte decision, in the words of eminent philosopher and philanthropist Cosmo Kramer, seems 'capricious and arbitrary'.

I could understand them saying at the end of last season, in 60 days, the Shiv is out, or them saying today that the bike is not legit 60 days from now, but this kind of idiocy just elevates professional wrestling to near-respectability.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HGKh4pTCDcg

I have to agree completely.

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

The trend toward extremely ugly regular bikes is disturbing.

Yep. That too. I miss my Fondriest P4. The new Fondriests are fugly.

 

[flicker]

I think the FELT and SCOTT TT bikes that I have seen at the ToC lately are astectically pleasing.

 

[theswordsman]

Velo News has some good info on Contador's reaction, and details from Specialized. They got the notice via e-mail. Contador rode his Transition for a while after the stage Saturday. The rest of the team will probably be on road bikes with handlebar extensions and aero wheels. It's meant to be windy today as well.

http://velonews.competitor.com/2010/02/news/contador-unhappy-about-uci-decision-to-ban-bike_105666

 

[Publicus]

Velo News has some good info on Contador's reaction, and details from Specialized. They got the notice via e-mail. Contador rode his Transition for a while after the stage Saturday. The rest of the team will probably be on road bikes with handlebar extensions and aero wheels. It's meant to be windy today as well.

http://velonews.competitor.com/2010/02/news/contador-unhappy-about-uci-decision-to-ban-bike_105666

The UCI really screwed them on this one.

 

[Bustedknuckle]

I agree with you to an extent. I don't think they should use their road bikes for TTs, but I would like to see TT bikes resemble the road bikes more. I like the aero bars and rear discs, but the addition of nose cones, recessed breaks, etc is too much. It's basically technological doping.

Didn't Cancellara win the Worlds on a Shiv?

Like altitude tents..I like the idea that they use whatever they road yesterday in the TT but then the road bikes would get all aero and stoopid looking..just for the TT. Way too much emphasis on TTs..Prolog, team TT, and the rest be road races.

 

[Ad Rock]

Velo News has some good info on Contador's reaction, and details from Specialized. They got the notice via e-mail. Contador rode his Transition for a while after the stage Saturday. The rest of the team will probably be on road bikes with handlebar extensions and aero wheels. It's meant to be windy today as well.

http://velonews.competitor.com/2010/02/news/contador-unhappy-about-uci-decision-to-ban-bike_105666

Actually, thats interesting... the Shiv pictured int hat article does NOT have the nose cone!.... Looks like they did away with it, as the dude said in the video that was linked earlier in the thred!... The problem is with the little wings on the downtube, which are similar to the ones that exist on transition frames as well.... only on this new Shiv they can't be removed!

 

[theswordsman]

So what's the plan from here? Paris-Nice starts two weeks from today with an 8 Km. TT. Then it's a week until Volta Ciclista a Catalunya, with a 3.6 Km. A week after that Pais Vasco begins, with a longer TT of 22 Km. to finish the race. I guess live with the Transition for seven weeks and hope they come up with a legal prototype in May some time?

 

[theswordsman]

The UCI really screwed them on this one.

The past few days did remind me a lot of The Flying Scotsman

 

[cyclopeon]

The past few days did remind me a lot of The Flying Scotsman

No comparison.

 

[ravens]

I have to agree completely.

...it all sounds pretty glamorous, but it's business as usual at Kramerica....

 

[hfer07]

So what's the plan from here? Paris-Nice starts two weeks from today with an 8 Km. TT. Then it's a week until Volta Ciclista a Catalunya, with a 3.6 Km. A week after that Pais Vasco begins, with a longer TT of 22 Km. to finish the race. I guess live with the Transition for seven weeks and hope they come up with a legal prototype in May some time?

Apparently Specialized will work on the Shiv to make it "comply" to whatever UCI regulations like to meet-& keep in mind is not Astana getting the setback but Saxo as well- so Bjarne will make some tough calls to get specialized to work day and night on the fix

 

[ustabe]

I believe the UCI's beef was the nose cone. Specialized had argued that it supported the handlebar, hence it was structural, and it needed to exceed the 3:1 aspect ratio rule due to the nature of its structural function. The UCI evidently decided to stop buying that explanation. I don't buy it either.

I'd really like to see the drag figures for these frames in a crosswind. I'll bet they're not that impressive.

Trek is working on a new bike that will debut at the 2010 TdF. Word is that the 3:1 rule will not be a factor and the bike will have better crosswind characteristics.

 

[richwagmn]

I believe the UCI's beef was the nose cone. Specialized had argued that it supported the handlebar, hence it was structural, and it needed to exceed the 3:1 aspect ratio rule due to the nature of its structural function. The UCI evidently decided to stop buying that explanation. I don't buy it either.

I'd really like to see the drag figures for these frames in a crosswind. I'll bet they're not that impressive.

Trek is working on a new bike that will debut at the 2010 TdF. Word is that the 3:1 rule will not be a factor and the bike will have better crosswind characteristics.

Well, how could you tell it isn't needed for support without seeing some engineering documentation?

Just another completely arbitrary decision by the UCI imo.

 

[karlboss]

I believe the UCI's beef was the nose cone. Specialized had argued that it supported the handlebar, hence it was structural, and it needed to exceed the 3:1 aspect ratio rule due to the nature of its structural function. The UCI evidently decided to stop buying that explanation. I don't buy it either.

I'd really like to see the drag figures for these frames in a crosswind. I'll bet they're not that impressive.

Trek is working on a new bike that will debut at the 2010 TdF. Word is that the 3:1 rule will not be a factor and the bike will have better crosswind characteristics.

I'm willing to bet every company says that every year.

 

[Publicus]

I'm willing to bet every company says that every year.

Including Specialized which is working on a new prototype in time for the Tour based on AC's input (recall that he was riding the competition's best bikes less than a year ago). Don't know of the new bikes will
make a difference beyond the pyschological benefit it gives the riders.

 

[balkou]

Wow, after a year passed by the UCI found that Specialized TT bikes are illegal? Am I wrong, or Cancellara won the WC TT race with the same bike in question?

 

[frenchfry]

The UCI really screwed them on this one.

It would be interesting to know if the UCI recently received a "donation" for controlling TT bikes of a certain team.

 

[theswordsman]

On my remark about this situation reminding me of The Flying Scotsman, the similarity was in the UCI announcing problems with the bike right before the event, causing problems for the rider and rushed changes and adjustments. The motivation may have been different, but the mechanic still had to get the saw out at the last minute due to interpretation of the rules. And Contador was really unhappy about the new bike Saturday night, and had serious doubts even after adjustments Sunday morning. Thanks for telling me I'm wrong, though, it added value to the thread.

The latest from Specialized's Simone Toccafondi, from Nieuwsblad via Google Translate:

Cutting to the Shiv model was not possible, so they let hastily Transition-old six models (from 2008) happened. There had also to be cut, and that was not evident. Only two to six went well. Those were reserved for Contador, the rest of the Astana riders worked on an off the timed wegfiets.

"The problem is that Alberto never rode on a Transition," says Toccafondi. "Three months, he trained at the Shiv, now he suddenly had a trial run with a bike that are not custom made. Moreover, we are a big problem for Paris-Nice (a goal for the Spaniard, ed). In two weeks time we can not build new carbon bikes. We are working on a solution.

http://www.nieuwsblad.be/sportwereld/article/detail.aspx?articleid=GE82MIDK2

 

[Ad Rock]

I believe the UCI's beef was the nose cone. Specialized had argued that it supported the handlebar, hence it was structural, and it needed to exceed the 3:1 aspect ratio rule due to the nature of its structural function. The UCI evidently decided to stop buying that explanation. I don't buy it either.

I'd really like to see the drag figures for these frames in a crosswind. I'll bet they're not that impressive.

Trek is working on a new bike that will debut at the 2010 TdF. Word is that the 3:1 rule will not be a factor and the bike will have better crosswind characteristics.

Nope, If you look at the pictures of the Shiv that Contador was planning to use, you can see that it was a newer version than what we saw Saxo on last year.... This version did not have the nose cone and had a much more 'traditional' looking front end. As stated in the article on Velonews (http://velonews.competitor.com/2010/02/news/contador-unhappy-about-uci-decision-to-ban-bike_105666) the problem is with secions of the frame below the headtube and behind the fork.... similar to the little 'wings' behind the fork on Transition frames, only these ones are bigger and likely hollow, so you can't cut them off!

 

[ustabe]

Including Specialized which is working on a new prototype in time for the Tour based on AC's input (recall that he was riding the competition's best bikes less than a year ago).

The end product will be interesting, and will indicate how privy Contador was to Trek's R&D. The Trek design is based on Kamm airfoils, which features a chopped-off tail. The airfoil is completed by stalled air trapped behind the airfoil. http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/first-look-trek-speed-concept-time-trial-bike-22271. Kamm airfoils have been used in motor sports since the early 1960s. http://www.supercars.net/carpics/518/1962_Ferrari_250GTO2.jpg

The advantages are an 8:1 airfoil that complies with the UCI's 3:1 rule, and improved yaw (crosswind) drag figures. Getting blown around by crosswinds on my Giant TCR and looking at the crazy tube profiles on some of the newest bikes got me thinking of research on yaw that I'd read about years ago. I think Trek is on to something.

 

[ustabe]

Well, how could you tell it isn't needed for support without seeing some engineering documentation?

You don't need documentation to see that the device that supports the handlebar on my bike doesn't need to look like a nose cone. In fact, it looks exactly like a Ritchey WCS 4-Axis stem.

To me, the controversy is amusing. I'm sure Specialized knew they were playing fast and loose with the concept of "structural member."

It reminds me of the "Yellow Banana," the aerodynamically enhanced 1966 Ford Galaxie that Junior Johnson built for NASCAR racing with sloped nose, chopped roof, and flattened rear fenders.http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/1966-nascar-2.jpg. Til then it was the most flagrant, uh, reinterpretation of the rules that NASCAR racing had ever seen. The car was allowed to run in the Dixie 400 before it was banned.

 

[Anonymous]

So for those who are all for the 'best tech" and are for technological advances are you also against the radio ban? Having a radio is "the best tech" in terms of communication. Is the UCI off on that tech issue too?