The doped bike exists (video of pro version)!

[D-Queued]

Re:

it is.

to get back to that bit of footage: it shows just how 'serious' the UCI take motorization. To post that footage as some sort of evidence that Contador's bike has been satisfactorily checked for motors is just another insult to the brain.
...

Agreed.

Fwiw Cipo's insinuations were after stage 5

@D-Queued.
This man has been a mechanic for professional teams for 30 years. I am quite sure he knows what he's doing. You trying to make it seem like he's just a clueless idiot while you yourself have zero years as a bike mechanic is quite a sad sight.

Indeed, he may well know what he is doing.

However, hitting the crankset with a mallet to slip past the drive side bearing is, shall we say, more bizarre than Cancellara moving his twinky finger on his handlebars.

And I'm here waiting for them to find a bag of discarded motors in the trash, like those needles in the Tour during the Lance years.

+1

Dear Dave,

Let me help you with some reading comprehension. From the Park Tools advice on external bearing cranksets:
"Push from right side until spindle comes out left cup. Fit is snug, and in some cases gentle use of a mallet may help."
"Next, loosen and remove arm cap and slide arm off. It it sometimes necessary to gently tap arm with mallet."

...

Seriously, if you're going to go to snark and insults, you should really try being right first.

Andddddd back to the motors!

Seriously, this isn't very good evidence of reading skill.

Neither of these cases (1. Insertion at the point when the spindle comes out of the left cup; and 2. Extraction) are what we see in the video, and what is being discussed.

Thus, to your point, if you are going to go to snark and insults, you should really try being right first.

...

actually, in support of Dave, he is merely attempting to focus ones eyes on the prize (idiom). The prize in this instance, is the legitimacy of the sport, and the entrenched culture of PEDs.

to sum up D-Q's postion (without wishing to put words in Dave's mouth) "if we seek to question legitimacy, why be sidetracked by some conspiracy which may or may not be a conspiracy, the elephant in the room in cycling wrt legitimacy and cheating, is not motors, but it is PEDs."

...

Thanks. That does well summarize my position.

that's a pretty favorable way of summing up d-queued's position.
I'd sum it up thus:
"small hidden motors in road bikes is science fiction".
...

And, that does not sum up my position. Rather, it is a self-serving gross oversimplification of what has actually been extensive entertaining of your comments and position.

You may note that, for example, this post actually agrees with one of your recent posts.

Daave.

 

[D-Queued]

...
It appears the full moon has transformed a meek, mild-mannered
"MAMIL" into a punk on a Pinarello, my friends, so we will forgive
his transgression of the forum rules.

Your issue?

There was no transgression in my post given that the statement was doubly conditional (if/might), fictional (it would never arise), and obviously rhetorical. In fact, had I added you might have better seen the implied humor.

But, how do the rules square with this post of yours? Are there not two, three or even four possible transgressions in there?

Ahem.

Dave.

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

...
And, that does not sum up my position. Rather, it is a self-serving gross oversimplification of what has actually been extensive entertaining of your comments and position.

You may note that, for example, this post actually agrees with one of your recent posts.

Daave.

that's a rather circumlocutory way of admitting you were wrong, but it's a start.

 

[D-Queued]

Re: Re:

...

that's a rather circumlocutory way of admitting you were wrong, but it's a start.

I'm not admitting that I am wrong. So please, don't keep trying to stuff words in my mouth.

I have admitted errors and changes of mind many times on these boards. And, I am certain that I will do it again. The record is pretty clear.

I even remember owning up to what I thought was a pretty egregious mistake where I didn't consult readily available data.

There are plenty of layers to this particular onion, however, and the crying hasn't stopped yet.

So, please continue.

Dave.

 

[sniper]

As i said, it's a start. Slowly getting there.

Meanwhile, ex-pro Thijs Zonneveld has turned his attention from professional cycling to science fiction writing.

It can. Of course it can. The technology is already there. Motor, a battery, switch on the steering wheel - it already exists at least five years.

http://www.ad.nl/ad/nl/5598/Sportcolumnisten/article/detail/3583027/2014/01/24/Motortje-batterijtje-knopje-op-het-stuur-het-bestaat-al-een-jaar-of-vijf.dhtml
to be fair, he also says there is zero evidence of it having ever been used in professional cycling. He should watch that Durand vid, imo.
Dave, have you seen durand? would be genuinely interested to hear your thoughts on it.

 

[D-Queued]

As i said, it's a start. Slowly getting there.

Meanwhile, ex-pro Thijs Zonneveld has turned his attention from professional cycling to science fiction writing.

It can. Of course it can. The technology is already there. Motor, a battery, switch on the steering wheel - it already exists at least five years.

http://www.ad.nl/ad/nl/5598/Sportcolumnisten/article/detail/3583027/2014/01/24/Motortje-batterijtje-knopje-op-het-stuur-het-bestaat-al-een-jaar-of-vijf.dhtml
to be fair, he also says there is zero evidence of it having ever been used in professional cycling. He should watch that Durand vid, imo.
Dave, have you seen durand? would be genuinely interested to hear your thoughts on it.

Hi Sniper,

Pretty sure I have looked at all the links you posted. Work/travel has slowed me down a bit, though. And, I recall needing a bunch of time at one point to respond once upon a time, but never did.

Thus, can you repost the link? Hopefully I will get enough of a lull to view/comment.

Dave.

 

[doperhopper]

How about trying to sell "Cancellara's motor" (e.g. from Flanders bike, with some good story )on ebay - to test how the public perceives this?

 

[mrhender]

http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1smgjgn

Giro 2015 and More
By: Michele Ferrari
Published: 2 Jun 2015

Snip.....

ELECTRIC BIKES - Ten years after the first "infiltrations" within the peloton, the UCI eventually and belatedly defined the penalties for this technological "doping".
So we started seeing the first wave of organized controls, even though a bit pre-announced and rough, sort of like a warning that "the party is over": my impression is that the UCI would not be able to hold this scandal at bay and it is doing its utmost to prevent and avoid serious investigations on the past.
I wonder if the inspectors checked, as well as frames, lenticular wheels and spokes, ideal structures where small motors can be hidden in the hubs...


snip...

 

[sniper]

yeah, Ferrari also mentioned the motors in his commentary of the CIRC report.
In that commentary too he said it was "something that has been going on for at least 10 years now".
Seems he (thinks he) knows something that we don't.

@Dave, this link should work:
http://www.wat.tv/video/cancellara-a-pas-tout-dit-2v7qj_2eyx7_.html
Mind, it's in French.

 

[D-Queued]

Re:

yeah, Ferrari also mentioned the motors in his commentary of the CIRC report.
In that commentary too he said it was "something that has been going on for at least 10 years now".
Seems he (thinks he) knows something that we don't.

@Dave, this link should work:
http://www.wat.tv/video/cancellara-a-pas-tout-dit-2v7qj_2eyx7_.html
Mind, it's in French.

Still reviewing....

Dave.

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

yeah, Ferrari also mentioned the motors in his commentary of the CIRC report.
In that commentary too he said it was "something that has been going on for at least 10 years now".
Seems he (thinks he) knows something that we don't.

@Dave, this link should work:
http://www.wat.tv/video/cancellara-a-pas-tout-dit-2v7qj_2eyx7_.html
Mind, it's in French.

Still reviewing....

Dave.

cool.
Imo the vid puts beyond reasonable doubt that the double bike change at the Ronde (from bike A to bike B, then after ca. 10km back to bike A) was premeditated. Questions that arise from that include: what was the premeditated double bike change for? What did the mechanic do to the bike in those ca. 15 mins? Why at that point of the race? Why in such an important race didn't they simply have a second, identical bike for Cance on the roof of the car?

And from the hear-say department (I couldn't confirm this, but found it being discussed on a German cycling forum):
1. After the race, Cance/CSC are said to have presented to the press a bike that was different from the bike he actually drove over the finish with;
2. Apparently in different interviews, when asked about the Breschel *** up, Riis gave different answers as to why the mechanic was missing (one answer being that they had accidentally forgotten the mechanic, which is clearly bogus)

 

[blackcat]

also sniper, a piece in your corner... since when did they institute bike changes as MO, and not just switch in tyres for punctures (inevitable justification will be punctures) cos everyone punctures in roubaix and flanders podium places. to me, that is kinda "iffy". not evidence, i am just wondering why it was one year, and one year only, that they are switching bikes, and not just replacing the wheel/tyre. does not make sense in isolation. i am sure that there would be a spinner making sense of it tho <eyesroll>

 

[sniper]

there was no sign of a flat tire.
and indeed if it had been a flat tire, why not just change the wheel.
CSC never gave us an explanation.

 

[blackcat]

Re:

and indeed if it had been a flat tire, why not just change the wheel.

that was my point.

however, there is so much going on in the race, it would be good to have definitive evidence from commissaires about bike changes, when, what time, etc. just the host broadcast or reporters "anecdotes" is some measure of evidence, but a low bar. i want incontroverable evidence, and this evidentiary threshold i wish for, i appreciate this is a paradox, it wont exist atm, until new race rules are in place.

 

[D-Queued]

Re: Re:

yeah, Ferrari also mentioned the motors in his commentary of the CIRC report.
In that commentary too he said it was "something that has been going on for at least 10 years now".
Seems he (thinks he) knows something that we don't.

@Dave, this link should work:
http://www.wat.tv/video/cancellara-a-pas-tout-dit-2v7qj_2eyx7_.html
Mind, it's in French.

Still reviewing....

Dave.

cool.
Imo the vid puts beyond reasonable doubt that the double bike change at the Ronde (from bike A to bike B, then after ca. 10km back to bike A) was premeditated. Questions that arise from that include: what was the premeditated double bike change for? What did the mechanic do to the bike in those ca. 15 mins? Why at that point of the race? Why in such an important race didn't they simply have a second, identical bike for Cance on the roof of the car?

And from the hear-say department (I couldn't confirm this, but found it being discussed on a German cycling forum):
1. After the race, Cance/CSC are said to have presented to the press a bike that was different from the bike he actually drove over the finish with;
2. Apparently in different interviews, when asked about the Breschel **** up, Riis gave different answers as to why the mechanic was missing (one answer being that they had accidentally forgotten the mechanic, which is clearly bogus)

Hi Sniper,

Ok, after watching the video many, many times, here are some points of interest:

1. Higher resolution video of this race than we have seen before. This is helpful. It appears that there may have been a couple of shifts on the pave hill, e.g. at 30s?
2. 0.34 to 0:42 This is the infamous breakaway, and the clip is when Cancellara blasts past the four guys who had moved slightly off the front prior to the excerpt shown here. IMHO, the most suspicious part appears to be that three of the four guys on the front are looking back. Even though they just moved (slightly) off the front, they are apparently waiting for someone else to do something, instead of responding to Cancellera. IMHO this is why Cancellera is able to gain so much ground so quickly - a complete lack of response from the group who effectively sit up and let him go.
3. 1:07 video of guy behind Cancellera waving his arm.
4. 1:24 TT bike dialog with focus on handlebar (left side, as opposed to rh side as discussed in other videos). If there is something suspicious here it isn’t shown.

Bike change clips:

5. 2:02 bike change
6. 2:31 a very slow bike change (20+ seconds), Cancellera initially takes a stretch, then gets anxious. It looks like they may have argued about which bike was ultimately selected
7. 4:10 Cancellera is drafting behind Saxobank car – isn’t that illegal??
8. 4:42 Another bike change, MUCH faster this time
9. 6:43 Same bike change shown again, with arrow pointing to roof rack. (Yes, the replacement bike came off the RHS of the car)
10. 7:21 another bike change (53 km point), question mark on car, arrow pointing to roof. Mechanic tries to get bike off of RHS of car, not only is this probably the one that they just put up there, but the bike appears be stuck with a bungie chord or something and it cannot be freed. Mechanic runs around grabs bike from LHS.

Obvious questions:
Did they give him the wrong bike the first time around?
Why did they have trouble getting the bike off the second time?
Was the bike on the LHS of the car the one that was intended for Cancellera?

Looks like a bunch of goof ups.

11. 8:31… 9:05 Another bike change. This time from a support guy waiting for him. It does, however, seem like a dangerous time to change bikes, given the speed/efforts going on at the front. However, the fact that there is a Rabobank guy with two spare wheels suggests that this was a designated wheel pit, or similar. Did they finally get Cancellera the right bike?

While watching this multiple times, a couple of further questions came to mind.

a. Looks like bike changes (e.g. in the case of the bike change from the crowd) can be MUCH faster than wheel changes. Why don't other teams do this more often?

b. Cancellera was riding an S-Works SL2 with a Specialized crankset. Would it even be possible to fit a motor into the seat tube and configure it to work with the Specialized crankset?

For the answer to this question, I consulted the Specialized site as well as the Vivax (Gruber) site.

From the Gruber site:

“…frame requirements:
Aluminium or steel frame (carbon on request)
Straight, continuous seat tube
Seat tube inner diameter of 31.6 or 30.9 mm
Shimano Hollowtech II crankset – with outer bearing shells (not pressed in)
Seat tube should be as central as possible on the bottom bracket”

http://www.vivax-assist.com/en/produkte/technik/nachruesten.html

From the Specialized site:

“The down tube, BB shell and seat tube employ a carbon-centric design. By eliminating sharp edges in the structure that have not been optimized for carbon fiber, we have exceeded the stiffness of bikes with wider BB shells and larger diameter tubing.

The seat tube is another noteworthy piece of engineering. The asymmetrical design provides adequate clearance for the crank and drivetrain on the drive-side, but flares outboard on the left side of the bike to maximize lateral rigidity at the BB – much like taking a wider stance with your feet keeps you more stable. “

http://www.specialized.com/bc/microsite/tarmacsl2/seo.html#bbcluster

(NOTE: SL3, etc., utilize similar geometry/construction)

Notably, aside from the fact that it is obviously not an aluminum or steel frame, and that it does not have a cylindrical seat tube, the BB shell in this bike is an uninterrupted (no holes) cylinder. There are no holes into the seat tube, downtube or chainstay tubes.

Given the construction techniques and the tube design, it may be very difficult if not impossible to efit a motor into the downtube of an S-Works bike (especially into a TT bike as it may not fit into the seat tube). The Tarmac SL2 (and successors) flares out at the BB, which means that fastening a motor perpendicular to the BB would be very challenging. Some sort of custom bushing inside the frame would be required, but that area is impossible to access without cutting the frame or BB shell. And, a motor could not extend into the BB area without cutting the BB shell. Even if you did cut the frame, a lot of work would still be required to try and align everything properly. This is exceptionally non-trivial.

Then there is the issue of the crankset. Vivax indicates that a Shimano Hollowtech II crankset is required. Yet, Cancellera clearly uses only the Specialized crankset.

Extending this insight into the recent inspection at the Giro, and one can add more data points on the pointless nature of the UCI's three ring circus. Contador was also riding a Specialized bike that would have all of the above issues.

In summary:

1. There doesn't appear to be any smoking gun from the Durand video. Other than perhaps the mechanics screwed up with one of the bike changes

2. We have multiple examples of Cancellera changing gears and moving his right hand in a manner similar to what was suggested was extremely unusual for him. In other words, he does it all the time.

3. Compatability of an internal motor with Cancellera's bike is a real stretch. This makes something which was already highly unlikely even more remote as a possibility.

Dave.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Thanks Dave.

 

[blackcat]

thnx for the research D-Q.

 

[sniper]

yeah, excellent post, d-queued.
love how you double checked whether a motor would at all fit in Fab's S-bike.
that's quality research. However, i'm not sure if it holds in light of the claim (hear-say) that Fab changed his bike again shortly after the finish. So the finish bike shown to the press may not have had the same qualities/materials as the one he drove up the Muur with.
Just saying, although I love your argument, I still think there would be scope for Cancellara to cheat there by using different materials from the ones listed on the website.

wrt the bike switches: when you say it looks like a bunch of screw ups, I think you did not fully get the evidence put forward by Durand. The summary of the evidence: this wasn't a series of screw ups, it was premeditated.

They even bring out a map to show that the place/curve where the switch (back to his old bike) took place was very likely NOT a coincidence, but a carefully picked spot: the curve comes right at the end of a stretch of road where the riders have to ride several kilometers whereas the mechanic can take a very convenient shortcut.

then there's the bidon evidence. Cance knew he was getting his old bike back.
There's more that I think you may have missed, I'll try to summarize it later.
Somebody with French in their repertoire should help me out here and tell me if this could be a series of screw ups as D-queued suggests.
To me (and to Durand) there cannot be any doubt that it was premeditated.

By the way, can somebody fresh up my memory: when were race radios introduced?

 

[ray j willings]

Motorola used them first [early 90s] and others followed ...they sort of sneaked in rather than being introduced.

 

[sniper]

thanks ray!

 

[D-Queued]

Re:

yeah, excellent post, d-queued.
love how you double checked whether a motor would at all fit in Fab's S-bike.
that's quality research. However, i'm not sure if it holds in light of the claim (hear-say) that Fab changed his bike again shortly after the finish. So the finish bike shown to the press may not have had the same qualities/materials as the one he drove up the Muur with.
Just saying, although I love your argument, I still think there would be scope for Cancellara to cheat there by using different materials from the ones listed on the website.

wrt the bike switches: when you say it looks like a bunch of screw ups, I think you did not fully get the evidence put forward by Durand. The summary of the evidence: this wasn't a series of screw ups, it was premeditated.

They even bring out a map to show that the place/curve where the switch (back to his old bike) took place was very likely NOT a coincidence, but a carefully picked spot: the curve comes right at the end of a stretch of road where the riders have to ride several kilometers whereas the mechanic can take a very convenient shortcut.

then there's the bidon evidence. Cance knew he was getting his old bike back.
There's more that I think you may have missed, I'll try to summarize it later.
Somebody with French in their repertoire should help me out here and tell me if this could be a series of screw ups as D-queued suggests.
To me (and to Durand) there cannot be any doubt that it was premeditated.

By the way, can somebody fresh up my memory: when were race radios introduced?

Thanks.

Yes, I tried to follow the French dialog, but only got part of it.

I did laugh, though, at the French for brake cables - literal translation 'end' cables? Double entendre?

I was trying to figure out what the map bit was about. Again, though, the Rabo guy with wheels was there as well. Thus, it cannot be argued that it wasn't premeditated

What we don't know is how far in advance this was premeditated, and what was the reason for any of the bike changes?

Even if Cancellera had a motor in any bicycle, ever, one of the issues with having to cut apart the frame is that there would have to be more and more people involved, and more and more testing, and more and more evidence to try and hide.

Moreover, getting someone to repair carbon isn't trivial, and even though the individual layers are pretty thin it is hard to avoid increasingly obvious bulges. This is even more true if the repair is in as critical an area as critical as BB. In fact, many/most/all carbon frame repair experts won't touch a BB which is why warranty replacements always cut out the BB. Good luck with the integrity of a repair down there. On pave. With a strong rider...

Sooner or later it is all unfathomable.

Dave.

 

[MacRoadie]

Re: Re:

yeah, excellent post, d-queued.
love how you double checked whether a motor would at all fit in Fab's S-bike.
that's quality research. However, i'm not sure if it holds in light of the claim (hear-say) that Fab changed his bike again shortly after the finish. So the finish bike shown to the press may not have had the same qualities/materials as the one he drove up the Muur with.
Just saying, although I love your argument, I still think there would be scope for Cancellara to cheat there by using different materials from the ones listed on the website.

wrt the bike switches: when you say it looks like a bunch of screw ups, I think you did not fully get the evidence put forward by Durand. The summary of the evidence: this wasn't a series of screw ups, it was premeditated.

They even bring out a map to show that the place/curve where the switch (back to his old bike) took place was very likely NOT a coincidence, but a carefully picked spot: the curve comes right at the end of a stretch of road where the riders have to ride several kilometers whereas the mechanic can take a very convenient shortcut.

then there's the bidon evidence. Cance knew he was getting his old bike back.
There's more that I think you may have missed, I'll try to summarize it later.
Somebody with French in their repertoire should help me out here and tell me if this could be a series of screw ups as D-queued suggests.
To me (and to Durand) there cannot be any doubt that it was premeditated.

By the way, can somebody fresh up my memory: when were race radios introduced?

Thanks.

Yes, I tried to follow the French dialog, but only got part of it.

I did laugh, though, at the French for brake cables - literal translation 'end' cables? Double entendre?

I was trying to figure out what the map bit was about. Again, though, the Rabo guy with wheels was there as well. Thus, it cannot be argued that it wasn't premeditated

What we don't know is how far in advance this was premeditated, and what was the reason for any of the bike changes?

Even if Cancellera had a motor in any bicycle, ever, one of the issues with having to cut apart the frame is that there would have to be more and more people involved, and more and more testing, and more and more evidence to try and hide.

Moreover, getting someone to repair carbon isn't trivial, and even though the individual layers are pretty thin it is hard to avoid increasingly obvious bulges. This is even more true if the repair is in as critical an area as critical as BB. In fact, many/most/all carbon frame repair experts won't touch a BB which is why warranty replacements always cut out the BB. Good luck with the integrity of a repair down there. On pave. With a strong rider...

Sooner or later it is all unfathomable.

Dave.

Couple of thoughts/questions along the lines of the carbon frame:

1. Even though the exterior seat tube profile is aero/asymmetrical, the inflatable bladders/sleeves used to lay up and form the tubes in the mold are still round (or at least most that I have seen are). As the seat tube has a round section at the top to received a "standard" (rather than aero) set post/mast, it stands to reason that the interior shape will be continuous down to the BB shell, regardless of how the carbon is laid up on the outside (why change shape halfway downstream, and a round interior is going to be the strongest structurally to-boot).

2. Do we know for sure that the bottom of the seat tube doesn't open into the BB shell? It's not uncommon to see the seat tube, down tube, and chain stays open into the shell, often times to remove the bladders, or just because there is no reason to add weight with structurally unnecessary carbon.

Here is a photo of a earlier (ca 2008-2009) Tramac SL2 BB:

And here is a cutaway of a BB from a 2010 Tarmac SL2:

I don't disagree that there may be some drilling required through the BB shell to get to the crank spindle, and that it wouldn't be the easiest thing to do running a bit down the seat tube, but I also can't imagine it being impossible with the use of a drill press and a jig.

Some food for thought...

 

[GJB123]

Re: Re:

Couple of thoughts/questions along the lines of the carbon frame:

1. Even though the exterior seat tube profile is aero/asymmetrical, the inflatable bladders/sleeves used to lay up and form the tubes in the mold are still round (or at least most that I have seen are). As the seat tube has a round section at the top to received a "standard" (rather than aero) set post/mast, it stands to reason that the interior shape will be continuous down to the BB shell, regardless of how the carbon is laid up on the outside (why change shape halfway downstream, and a round interior is going to be the strongest structurally to-boot).

2. Do we know for sure that the bottom of the seat tube doesn't open into the BB shell? It's not uncommon to see the seat tube, down tube, and chain stays open into the shell, often times to remove the bladders, or just because there is no reason to add weight with structurally unnecessary carbon.

Here is a photo of a earlier (ca 2008-2009) Tramac SL2 BB:

And here is a cutaway of a BB from a 2010 Tarmac SL2:

I don't disagree that there may be some drilling required through the BB shell to get to the crank spindle, and that it wouldn't be the easiest thing to do running a bit down the seat tube, but I also can't imagine it being impossible with the use of a drill press and a jig.

Some food for thought...

Impossible? Probably not. Unlikely? Very much so imho. As I stated already Specialized produces specifically reinforced bikes for Cancellara because of his brute strength. Compromising the structural integrity of a frame going over cobbles with one of the most powerful cyclist just doesn't wash. If we are to use Occam's Razor (as sniper seems so fond of doing) this just wouldn't stand up.

 

[MacRoadie]

I don't disagree whatsoever. Any removal of material that could reduce structural integrity, even in an over-engineered frameset, is asking for trouble. Especially with a rider the size of Cancellara, and a course as brutal as Paris-Roubaix or Flanders.

Having said that, there IS the real possibility that there is material in that BB sleeve (just the insert, not the whole shell matrix) that serves no structural purpose whatsoever, and is there either for ease of assembly, to ensure proper bearing alignment, or to keep dirt/water from entering the shell from any of the connecting tubes..

 

[D-Queued]

Re: Re:

Couple of thoughts/questions along the lines of the carbon frame:

1. Even though the exterior seat tube profile is aero/asymmetrical, the inflatable bladders/sleeves used to lay up and form the tubes in the mold are still round (or at least most that I have seen are). As the seat tube has a round section at the top to received a "standard" (rather than aero) set post/mast, it stands to reason that the interior shape will be continuous down to the BB shell, regardless of how the carbon is laid up on the outside (why change shape halfway downstream, and a round interior is going to be the strongest structurally to-boot).

2. Do we know for sure that the bottom of the seat tube doesn't open into the BB shell? It's not uncommon to see the seat tube, down tube, and chain stays open into the shell, often times to remove the bladders, or just because there is no reason to add weight with structurally unnecessary carbon.

... images snipped - see other images below ...

I don't disagree that there may be some drilling required through the BB shell to get to the crank spindle, and that it wouldn't be the easiest thing to do running a bit down the seat tube, but I also can't imagine it being impossible with the use of a drill press and a jig.

Some food for thought...

Hi Macroadie,

Yes, the BB shell has no openings except for the crank itself. Yes, that could be drilled which would be challenging (special drill bit, hard to maintain drilling accuracy, impact to the integrity of the frame), but possible.

Here is an image of the BB shell - no holes:

With respect to your thoughts that the BB/seat tube might be asymmetrical externally, but possibly cylindrical internally, please consider how the BB area is molded.

A consistent sleeve of carbon fiber is laid up and placed in the mold and the bladders are inserted into the inside of that sleeve. They press the carbon fiber sleeve against the mold shape. Thus, the internal dimensions of the tubes are very similar to the external shape.

The internal guts of the seat tube likely are even more problematic.

Please consider this quote from p. 38 of the Specialized Brochure on the Roubaix frame (http://specialized.com/OA_MEDIA/pdf/catalogs/SWorks2011-EN-final.pdf);

"...After Fabian won Paris-Roubaix in 2010—riding away from the pack at 49.5 kilometers and never looking back ... our proprietary, top-of-the-line frame construction, the onepiece chainstay/BB minimizes flex at the critical power transfer junction where crank arms meet frame. The BB and head tube use internally raised ribs to optimize fiber alignment for greater stiffness ... Brake and shifter cables are routed through the frame tubes, exiting at the BB"

One piece BB and Chainstay:

Due to the 'one piece BB and chainstay unit' design and forming, the seat tube may or may not be cylindrical at the base even if bladders are used for the seat tube itself (which they are). Bladders are, after all, flexible and would press the carbon fiber to conform with the external walls being formed by the mold. Bladders would not enforce an internal cylindricality lest they compromise the integrity during carbon lay-up. You need to have consistent pressure against the mold.

Here is a picture of the one-piece BB/Chainstay molding operation:

Brake and Shifter Cables (no holes in BB shell):

The brake and shifter cables had to exit at the BB because there are no holes in the BB for them to run through.

Moreover, the one-piece BB/chainstay section probably does have some sort of inner sleeve to join with the upper/main part of the seat tube with the bottom part/BB. You obviously cannot simply butt joint the two pieces together. Any inconsistency in the internal walls from such an internal sleeve would further encumber fitting of an internal motor.

Such inconsistency also possible due to the "internal ribbing" mentioned multiple times in the above quotes.

At the top of the seat tube, like other carbon frames, there is an insert in the seat tube for the seat post.

That means for multiple reasons that some sort of bushing(s) would still have to be inserted below the seatpost insert to align a motor properly. That is really hard to do without cutting the frame. And any internal ribbing, or even minor inconsistency on the inner tube walls would almost certainly preclude anything but cutting the frame open to try and install said motor.

Dave.