wow its the same bike very dentist brand has been making for 15 years, except with even more proprietary junk and QA-Failed Bin SRAM instead of Entry Level Shimano

That guy who got killed by the electric scooter dirtbag was riding one of those

I really do not understand the appeal, it's so shamelessly a cash grab aimed at people who open their wallets at the word SCIENCE, and it's permanently stigmatized by the association with Israel, genuinely how are they even in business?

Thats not a recumbent though....

>>2074857
>le aero cutout
>le aero rims
>for knobby tires that create fucktons of turbulence, inherent rolling resistance by design, and are wider than le aero rims/frame negating all performance benefits
further proof that cyclists don't actually understand bicycles, or really any vehicle at all, and are merely meme obsessed base slaves

>>2074863
Amen, brudda. Show us a correct design.

>>2074863
>you're not allowed to optimize aerodynimcs if you want to use the wider tyre

???

>inherent rolling resistance by design, and are wider than le aero rims/frame negating all performance benefits

that's not even true

File: Specialized-S-Works-Aethos-Road-Bike-Article-Siffness-To-Weight2.jpg (166.7 KB)

i hate dropped stays

File: 39196820_1.jpg (299.0 KB)

>>2074873
[muffled rap music in distance]

>>2074861
>That guy who got killed by the electric scooter dirtbag was riding one of those
And nothing of value was lost.

>>2074875
For a dick bike, I would unironically find that bike to be close to ideal looks-wise, if not for the fuckin specialized s on the head tube. It really channels the classic unc breaks frame aesthetic that was sadly lost when progress happened (I like dick breaks but they don't look as good)

I hate specialized so much it's unreal though, so I do not feel any urge to acquire that thing. It is totally not because I cannot afford it, ok? It's a matter of principle. Let me tell you what I'd get if I had money. (insert something obscure and autistically researched to show how sophisticated I am)

File: speedking.png (463.3 KB)

>>2074863
>inherent rolling resistance by design
I'll give you that they are decidedly not aero, but 'Tals are successors to the 'Kings, and Kings already rolled stupidly fast even in lab tests. In real world, thin tires are entirely obsolete.

>>2074882
what is traction and how does it work

>>2074882
>'Tals are successors to the 'Kings, and

Argotals?
Hydrotals?
Kryptotals?
Xynotals?
Rubantals?
Magnotals?
Trinotals?

Maybe you should stop posting if you're this ignorant.

>>2074882
>the hub is better so soft tires magically don't lose any energy anymore but also extra magically maintain perfect traction without deformation

>>2074877
Please kill yourself.

>>2074877
>DUIcycle

>>2074857
The cause of unnecessary back strains to come

>>2074863
design a better bike then you fatbodied cunt nigger

>>2074986
buy me a pipe bender and a welder and i will

>>2074947
>>2074902
the rubber compound is the single biggest factor
wider tires roll better than narrow ones, you can go look up the data on various tire manufacturer sites rn
the more you know

>>2074875
Go make another overpriced aluminum bike Ron.

>>2074997
yes, up to a point.
And byciclerolllingresistance.com uses a rather small drum for their tests, which possibly favours tires that do well under significat deformation.
Under a different testing scenario, there can be large penalties for wide tires on pavement: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iq9ydwkRt0Q&t=969s

>>2075002
wish the guy on that website would quit testing the same fucking tires repeatedly. who keeps voting for this shit.
Don't need 100 tests of the same Grand Prix 5000
Don't need 40 tests of Pirelli P Zero tires that are literally the same fucking thing
Don't need 50 tests of this __slightly__ different version of Vittorias that perform the same god damn thing.
Don't need 100

>>2075016
I only sub for a month at a time when it's new tires tiem, but one of my gripes with the site is that he publishes like one test of one line of tires that has like 18 sizes available, IDGAF what the performance of the 700x23 is if I'm not riding 700x23

So although I've never participated in the voting I can understand why he's doing that

>>2074905
The anon with dyslexia is propably refering to Conti Race Kings and Conti Dubnitals

>>2075002
It is questionable, whether such tiny drum lab tests without a rider can be transfered to real world riding at all. The trend goes to running testing rigs out in the field with some interesting new insights:
https://www.renehersecycles.com/tires-and-pressure-new-research-and-what-it-means/

that a tire "rolls faster" makes no fucking sense as an engineering statement

>>2074863
Youre slow.

>>2075037
X amount of wats through the wheel + Y distance travelled over set period of time= Z rolling efficiency
If the x remains constant and the Y changes you have a faster or slower rolling tire. I swear most engineers are actual retards.

File: Nurburgring.svg.png (41.5 KB)

>>2075039
it would be more useful to describe the tire as having (fewer/less in) losses, not "being faster", and some of those losses are Good, Actually because they're associated with actually having grip. if you were to listen to bike nerds about what makes a good tire, you'd end up with 0.2mm of silicone sheeting around a three inch wide carbon fibre coil and it would be absolute dogshit

saying the tire is "faster" is pure marketing copy slop to appeal to retarded dentists who think the same pedaling speed will magically get them better times down the MUP because they got 120$ tires instead of 9$ ones. it is 100% a trick to fool (You) into thinking you will get a higher top speed despite ghost pedaling at a blistering 15kmh due to modern retardo gearing setups

you'll notice that this sort of language almost never appears in marketing for tires for any other sort of vehicle and as you get to the "fastest" variant of a whole wheel with tire for any other sort of vehicle, you either see comparatively thin tires on fuckhuge rims for tarmac with the only limit being the wheel's structural integrity (and the driver's unwillingness to crush his spine whenever he hits a pebble), or "fuck it we ball" huge tires on tiny rims for offroad because the losses from a "slow" tire are outpaced by not having traction at all

also a big lol on >>2075035 because i am fond of calling out cyclists and bike "engineers" for trying to re-invent shit that the automotive world has called old hat for decades if not almost a century:
>Why hasn’t anybody else tested tires on real roads under carefully controlled conditions until now?
picrel has existed for 99 fucking years. literally. it was completed in 1927

and even then there are LITERALLY specialized machines specifically for testing tires. wild how none of these ad rag magazines think to call up a company that has one

>>2075037
coefficient of rolling resistance

>>2075050
>>2075046
>>2075039
>>2075038
>>2075037
*hits crack pipe* u sayin i gotta in flate my tyre's?

>>2075051
Nah.

>>2075046
>would be more useful to describe the tire as having (fewer/less in) losses, not "being faster
You're just arguing about semantics which is retarded
>you'll notice that this sort of language almost never appears in marketing for tires for any other sort of vehicle
Fuel efficient tires
You're so convinced you're smart but you're actually a fucking dimwit.

>>2074857
If your bike doesn't look like this you're poor

>>2075393
Yawn

>>2074902
traction is simply the static friction between your tire and the ground times the normal force

rolling resistance is energy loss during tire shape restoration as it is deloaded

they are not necessarily the same thing

a train has fuck all rolling resistance and literally tons of traction

>>2075051
NO!!! DO NOT DO THIS> YOU HAVE TO RUN TUBELESS FOR LOWER PRESSURE