New Planet X TT Bike: The EXOCET

tunney

dreadzedan wrote: »

Did it matter in the windtunnel?
This is my point.

Figures - link to study.
Was there a rider on the bike?
Did all bikes have the same wheels?
Where the frame sizes all the same?

I have a study proving that my Raliegh chopper with streamers is the fastest TT bike in the world - but I'm not sharing it. You just have to believe me.

tunney

dreadzedan wrote: »

perhaps if Cervelo post the wind tunnel data or any other manufacturer for that matter about how their design is superior.

HAHAHA there is wind tunnel data freely available from kestrel, trek and cervelo. Look around, educate yourself, come back.

dreadzedan

Lumen wrote: »

That would suggest a complete bike price of £1500-£2500 depending on spec. I'm not sure putting bottom end components on an £800 frame makes any sense, so I'm guessing prices will start around £2k.

What i was trying to get through to tunney is that PX did not see it fit to put cabling behind the headset or concealed, due to their wind tunnel aero testing in Sandiego against other 2010 top rated TT bike with concealed front and rear brakes, which the exocet had better aero than.
They didnt do things they saw as unnecessary and got a good price bike.

People just dont like underdogs being decent performers fullstop.

Tunney has to see that all the stupid **** on his new bike did not matter to px according to their test to get good aero.
Different Manufacturers different methods.

I am wasting time cause i am sure there will be a lot of foot in mouth when this bikes launches just like with the Stealth pro.

TinyExplosions

dreadzedan wrote: »

http://issuu.com/planetx/docs/testing_times_december page 9 gawd

I don't want to state the obvious, but this is Planet X's own circular, so any data in it should be taken with a large grain of salt, or read as a brochure. It's by no means an independent review.

As for cables, tunney is talking very specifically... the Trek Speed concept (which is set to be the 2011 consumer TT frame) has no visible cables near the head tube:



the cables run in the bars, and then through the special housing shown above. His one and only point in this whole thread is that the Planet X differs from this, and that (in his view), this is important for aerodynamics, as it's where the dirty air is. Cables at the rear of the bike are in 'clean' air, so have less of an impact on the aerodynamics

Lumen

To save mouse wear, here is the relevant extract from "Testing Times" (which is as far as I know the Planet-X newsletter).

dreadzedan

tunney wrote: »

Figures - link to study.
Was there a rider on the bike?
Did all bikes have the same wheels?
Where the frame sizes all the same?

I have a study proving that my Raliegh chopper with streamers is the fastest TT bike in the world - but I'm not sharing it. You just have to believe me.

Im not sure if you know this but, all those big name companies are obligated to state their bike is the best to keep their name up and get sales, cause their **** is naturally overpriced.
Show me the figures go ahead.

tunney

dreadzedan wrote: »

Im not sure if you know this but, all those big name companies are obligated to state their bike is the best to keep their name up and get sales, cause their **** is naturally overpriced.
Show me the figures go ahead.

And your study is different? You are not obligated to do the same?

tunney

Lumen wrote: »

To save mouse wear, here is the relevant extract from "Testing Times" (which is as far as I know the Planet-X newsletter).

Being pedantic but what they say is "In every test the Exocet was evaluated to be in the top category."

They never said it was best in category or top 5 in the top category, just that it was in the top category. Some data and exact placing would be nice.

dreadzedan

tunney wrote: »

Being pedantic but what they say is "In every test the Exocet was evaluated to be in the top category."

They never said it was best in category or top 5 in the top category, just that it was in the top category. Some data and exact placing would be nice.

i never ever said the bike was the best in the category dude, i just said it is a good bike for a good price beginning. the fact that it is considered to be i the top category hence it has not cable routing hidden brakes mombo jumbo like you said is good. this is a testing times article, not off the planet x website.
Fact of the matter is that for the price the bike cannot be beat, and it will more than likely perform weather you want it to or not.
to add, you have showed me absolutely nothing anywhere to prove that study wrong. until then go home.
show me somewhere where it shoes how superior your little innovations are, this came from the testing times, all your info will come from off of the makers webpage, duhh:) as they are obligated as i said to praise their product.

tunney

dreadzedan wrote: »

i never ever said the bike was the best in the category dude, i just said it is a good bike for a good price beginning. the fact that it is considered to be i the top category hence it has not cable routing hidden brakes mombo jumbo like you said is good. this is a testing times article, not off the planet x website.
Fact of the matter is that for the price the bike cannot be beat, and it will more than likely perform weather you want it to or not.
to add, you have showed me absolutely nothing anywhere to prove that study wrong. until then go home.
show me somewhere where it shoes how superior your little innovations are, this came from the testing times, all your info will come from off of the makers webpage, duhh:) as they are obligated as i said to praise their product.

WHAT STUDY????? You have a clipping from a publication that your company wrote.

Seriously argue like an adult or put stablisers on your PX.

dreadzedan

tunney wrote: »

Being pedantic but what they say is "In every test the Exocet was evaluated to be in the top category."

They never said it was best in category or top 5 in the top category, just that it was in the top category. Some data and exact placing would be nice.

You showed me exacting nothing anywhere proving anything but why you think your bike should cost 2k more.
Seriously dude, and all of you, i hope your foot does not end up in your mouth on this bikes debut.
Your bike's silly innovations not worth the extra price according to PX.
That is the nature of competition they will try to discredit and shoot down one another constantly, get used to it. im sure that the other manufacturers will stand still neither will PX.

dreadzedan

tunney wrote: »

WHAT STUDY????? You have a clipping from a publication that your company wrote.

Seriously argue like an adult or put stablisers on your PX.

Its a 2 page article, and you dont have anything except your words, which mean nothing since your are pretty much a no-body, Ian Cammish tested the bike for your information, and published his findings and thoughts about the innitial prototype bike.
NOt any website propaganda you will indefinably bring to me.

mloc123

http://www.bryanappleyard.com/blog/uploaded_images/duty_calls-742039.bmp

mloc123

dreadzedan wrote: »

Its a 2 page article, and you dont have anything except your words, which mean nothing since your are pretty much a no-body, Ian Cammish tested the bike for your information, and published his findings and thoughts about the innitial prototype bike.
NOt any website propaganda you will indefinably bring to me.

Seriouly, are planet x paying you per post?

tunney

dreadzedan wrote: »

Its a 2 page article, and you dont have anything except your words, which mean nothing since your are pretty much a no-body, Ian Cammish tested the bike for your information, and published his findings and thoughts about the innitial prototype bike.
NOt any website propaganda you will indefinably bring to me.

Link to published findings?

I'm not bringing any facts or figures as you have provided the "proof" for my point - that the PX does not have modern styled cable routing.

The only way that this cable routing could be proved unnessary is if PX tested the Exocet with and without behind the headset routing. If you did please do fish out the differences in drag and post here - I'd be most interested.

dreadzedan

tunney wrote: »

Link to published findings?

I'm not bringing any facts or figures as you have provided the "proof" for my point - that the PX does not have modern styled cable routing.

The only way that this cable routing could be proved unnessary is if PX tested the Exocet with and without behind the headset routing. If you did please do fish out the differences in drag and post here - I'd be most interested.

You have proved my point by posting the article that it did not really matter if they were not modern.
behind the headset routing didn't do crap for your POS overpriced bikes.
You and your friend Molc or whatever have to do better

tunney

dreadzedan wrote: »

You have proved my point by posting the article that it did not really matter if they were not modern.
behind the headset routing didn't do crap for your POS overpriced bikes.
You and your friend Molc or whatever have to do better

This is your blorg or lumen or tiny just trying to do a wind up.
Nice one

Nietzschean

dreadzedan wrote: »

You have proved my point by posting the article that it did not really matter if they were not modern.
behind the headset routing didn't do crap for your POS overpriced bikes.
You and your friend Molc or whatever have to do better

Do better than you quoting a press release? so far i've seen nothing from either side of this debate of merit. Tunney and Molc have more standing around here on these topics with me anyway as they are both tri heads who care about this stuff in a mostly non-biased manner.

You are someone with nearly no posts who just keeps going on about how wonderful this bike you haven't ridden is, based on a press release from PX from what i can see.

dreadzedan

mloc123 wrote: »

Seriouly, are planet x paying you per post?

they should for having to deal with idiots like you and tunney.:D

tunney

Nietzschean wrote: »

Do better than you quoting a press release? so far i've seen nothing from either side of this debate of merit.

The funny bit is - all I've said (and mloc) is that it doesn't have behind the headset cable routing.

I've not seen wind tunnel data and I've not ridden it - as such I've not commented on its aerodynamics nor its ride quality. It may well be a super-duper ultra fast speed machine. However there is no evidence either way on this.

mloc123

dreadzedan wrote: »

they should for having to deal with idiots like you and tunney.:D

Nice. For the record I have nothing against planet x, they rebrand cheap carbon frames and have there place. I do have something againts shills tho'

Doc_Savage

if you wanna get into the finer details of the cable hiding debate.... mike burrows book states that trek made aero seatposts for tt bikes that had less drag in a wind tunnel than a brake cable!

rule of thumb for aero profiles is that it must be four times longer than wide to let the profile shape have ANY advantage in terms of it's CD. and putting two profiles close together (he used spinergy rev-x wheels as an example but also reffered to brakes and forks) effectively added the drag coefficient of one of those profiles to the pair(.5 increase to each).

how much this adds to performance or real world results is a grey area that he refuses to get dragged into!

and planet x are making a bit of money at the minute and expanding their business! fair play to them to take on the big companies!

TinyExplosions

dreadzedan wrote: »

Its a 2 page article, and you dont have anything except your words, which mean nothing since your are pretty much a no-body, Ian Cammish tested the bike for your information, and published his findings and thoughts about the innitial prototype bike.
NOt any website propaganda you will indefinably bring to me.

Calm down mate, it's only the internets!

Yes, it's a two page article, but it's written by Planet X themselves. 'Testing Times' is the newsletter they publish every month (or something like that), so it can be seen as essentially a brochure for the company. Also, they use very open ended statements like 'in the top category' that doesn't prove anything conclusively (you would need figures for that, and there just aren't any there).

Iam Cammish is a Planet X sponsored rider, and has been for a very long time, so again, his views can really only be taken as being the views of the company, which are that the bike is fantastic in every way imaginable.

No one here is trying to justify the cost of their bike, and in fact, no one has said that a Cervelo P4 or anything is better than the Planet X, you are just assuming everyone that doesn't agree with you is a hater, and that's only true in Tunney's case (but then he's special, cos he's a triathlete who we tolerate round here for the amusement he brings )

For the record, I think that Planet X make great bikes, I'm a very happy owner of one, and would most likely buy another if I needed one, and would certainly get a Stealth, or Exocet, because in bang for buck terms, they suit me perfectly.

At the end of the day, everyone here is working on supposition, as there are no hard and fast figures to prove your point, or Tunney's -only a press release from the company concerned, which in your own words should invalidate anything that is said. At least Tunney has the good grace to say that his comments are his opinion

Oh, and Tunney, I wish it was me winding you up as dreadzedan, but I don't have a the mad skillz to argue like that

stevie_b

dreadzedan wrote: »

they should for having to deal with idiots like you and tunney.:D

seriously 'dude', you should be more concerned about the aerodynamics of that chip on your shoulder over any external cable routing; maybe get it a little aero-helmet with dimples.

you've read all the planetx propaganda and have seen the light - halleluja! - we get it.

blorg

TinyExplosions wrote: »

Iam Cammish is a Planet X sponsored rider, and has been for a very long time, so again, his views can really only be taken as being the views of the company, which are that the bike is fantastic in every way imaginable.

Cammish is an employee, as far as I know. Certainly he has been very helpful in email exchanges with me over the two Planet Xes I bought. Great rider but you can't honestly expect him to say anything other than it's brilliant, given his position.

I don't think dreadzedan is a shill or PX employee; as Tiny said before PX actually do post on other forums and have been quite open about where the bikes come from etc. and take quite a different tone. I think he's just a fan... maybe a little extreme in his love of the PX but there you go. The "anti-tunney" in matters related to Planet X if you will @dreadzedan- there are a lot of PX owners on this forum that are very happy with their bikes but you are overdoing it a bit!

Quigs Snr

I don't think dreadzedan is a shill or has anything to do with PX either. It would be out of character with how PX interact on other forums. He's either a windup from a forum member or a semi literate fanboi with a chip on his shoulder. He is no bike expert thats for sure as evidenced by his complete inability to grasp the differences in cable routing that Tunney was talking about. Whether the routing matters is another question, but the fact that it is different cannot be disputed.

I have a PX Stealth and its fine for me. For the record I have 2 Cervelo's and 2 Treks also. So I'd like to think my opinion is balanced and I am not a badge snob. That being said, much as I love my Stealth, I would without one second's hesitation throw it over a cliff for a Cervelo P2C, P3C or P4C or any of the Treks for that matter, because they are simply better engineered, whether that engineering translates into any tangible performance improvement on the road is another question however. In it's price bracket, and for a roadie who grudgingly has to do the odd TT as part of a stage race the Stealth cannot be beaten at that price and won't hold anyone back. If I were beaten by someone on a P4C then I wouldn't blame it on the bike.

My problem with the Exocet is if the pricing is as rumoured, then it is in direct competition with some lower specced big brands. At that point PX are losing their market advantage which is price. A good product at a great price is what they have built their reputation on, whilst Cervelo for example focus on a premium product for a premium price. If I were PX, I would not get above myself and re-assess who my target market are. They have gotten it badly wrong with the Nano and I get the impression that sales have not been stellar so far. No surprise there because as well specced as they are people with that amount of cash to spend tend to be thinking of other brands, rightly or wrongly thats just the way it is.

... oh yeah... seriously Dreadzedan, you are going on about PX's brochure, testing times like it's a published scientific journal... give me a break.... they can't name the competitor they are better than ? Sure they can. If its true. Thats like saying you are quite a catch, your mammy says so, she even put it in writing and we cannot dispute that unless we get a panel of experts to do a study to prove you are not.

Like I say PX are a good little budget company and Cammish is a good skin too, very helpful and a joy to deal with. But please, enough of rhetoric about bogus scientific studies that may or may not have happened and PX scientists as sheffied uni.... you might want to recheck that connection with sheffield, there is one for sure, but PX scientists ! You crack me up.

Planet X

I might be wrong, but was there some Aussie dude who rode an old PX frame (same mould, Ridley) in a TdeF TT a few years ago, who did a good time?
CE?

dreadzedan

Quigs Snr wrote: »

I don't think dreadzedan is a shill or has anything to do with PX either. It would be out of character with how PX interact on other forums. He's either a windup from a forum member or a semi literate fanboi with a chip on his shoulder. He is no bike expert thats for sure as evidenced by his complete inability to grasp the differences in cable routing that Tunney was talking about. Whether the routing matters is another question, but the fact that it is different cannot be disputed.

I have a PX Stealth and its fine for me. For the record I have 2 Cervelo's and 2 Treks also. So I'd like to think my opinion is balanced and I am not a badge snob. That being said, much as I love my Stealth, I would without one second's hesitation throw it over a cliff for a Cervelo P2C, P3C or P4C or any of the Treks for that matter, because they are simply better engineered, whether that engineering translates into any tangible performance improvement on the road is another question however. In it's price bracket, and for a roadie who grudgingly has to do the odd TT as part of a stage race the Stealth cannot be beaten at that price and won't hold anyone back. If I were beaten by someone on a P4C then I wouldn't blame it on the bike.

My problem with the Exocet is if the pricing is as rumoured, then it is in direct competition with some lower specced big brands. At that point PX are losing their market advantage which is price. A good product at a great price is what they have built their reputation on, whilst Cervelo for example focus on a premium product for a premium price. If I were PX, I would not get above myself and re-assess who my target market are. They have gotten it badly wrong with the Nano and I get the impression that sales have not been stellar so far. No surprise there because as well specced as they are people with that amount of cash to spend tend to be thinking of other brands, rightly or wrongly thats just the way it is.

... oh yeah... seriously Dreadzedan, you are going on about PX's brochure, testing times like it's a published scientific journal... give me a break.... they can't name the competitor they are better than ? Sure they can. If its true. Thats like saying you are quite a catch, your mammy says so, she even put it in writing and we cannot dispute that unless we get a panel of experts to do a study to prove you are not.


Agreed but i was just mad cause Tunney was being somehwhat picky in his approach and comparing the PX's technology to bikes that cost 3x more, though they may not be 3x better.
Like I say PX are a good little budget company and Cammish is a good skin too, very helpful and a joy to deal with. But please, enough of rhetoric about bogus scientific studies that may or may not have happened and PX scientists as sheffied uni.... you might want to recheck that connection with sheffield, there is one for sure, but PX scientists ! You crack me up.

Maybe i got a bit carried away in taking tunney seriously i should have seen he is kind of a character on these forums. cant get away from them cant do without them, i have a resolution for brake and gear cables on all bikes, and i think everyone will agree. shimano Di2 and similar tech for brakes.
I know alot of people love PX cause, some people dont, so what, its a great budget company, that is getting a little more ambitious in their design but not price. nothing to be offended by or ashamed, its evolution.
I own a Felt B2 pro, i just liked this bike for its price and for what it was, a very good budget bike, to get a bike with it projected level of performane will cost you alot more than they charge despite it having what some people may see as short commings. what do you expect at such a price point, the bike should not even be carbon. Very good attempt by them and i think it will be a great little bike.

Shimano Di2 ftw, and i hope a similar braking system is made too.
there will be no more depate on cables after this electronice wireless technologies becomes more and more mainstream, and me and tunney will not have to argue about it:).

dreadzedan

Well i guess the proof will be in the pudding when the bike comes out, we will see how it is for real.

dreadzedan

Another point,
I may be wrong but any one can correct me if i am but
From what i saw most bikes at the PX Exocet's pricepoint $1049 frameset, do not have behind the headset cable routing.