Campag4life

We couldn't be more different. Yes the world is made up of many diverse people which does make it a better place. Your emotional label is joke. I laugh at your adherence to some odd aesthetic about straight tube sections. My background is design. I am all about form versus function. What I have done for a living and pretty obvious you haven't. Look how bicycles have changed in the last 30 years. Today's bikes look like spaceships compared bikes of 30 years ago. Same with automobiles. Cars today versus cars of the 30's or 50's. Aesthetic norms change with time. There will always be people like you with adherence to a particular aesthetic preference. But that isn't what the new Madone is about. Old aesthetic paradigms be damned. The new Madone isn't for wacky guys stuck with a particular aesthetic bias. It is for those that want the most advanced bike on the planet to ride as fast as their body will allow. To me, I see the function begets form in the design. You don't see it. The bike isn't for you.
Specialized was on the forefront of this frame shape. They have the best R&D in the world. Trek and all the top guys are not far behind.
We each have our opinion of the new Trek and each will stand. I love the new Madone. A superior shape that no doubt will be an amazing bike.

Campag4life

You are completely missing the point of why a curved top tube exists. The data you provide is largely irrelevant. A curve top tube isn't about aerodynamics...its about the ratio of vertical compliance to lateral stiffness. Please show me that data. You see the reason why all bikes are not postured for aerodynamics expressly...lets take the Trek Emonda or the Spesh Tarmac...both fantastic race bikes...is because of the relationship of vertical compliance to lateral stiffness. Section modulus aka moment of inertia of aero frame sections is precisely the opposite for aero sections versus what is desired for this best ratio. Many for example will opt for a Tarmac say over a Venge for this exact reason. The feel of the Tarmac is so much better than a Venge over a long race when rider fatigue factors in.
Show me that data and believe me when I tell you that data will be flawed as well. Vertical compliance and lateral stiffness throughout an entire range of ride loading in and out of the saddle isn't a handful of data put out to the public as marketing fodder to sell bike as in the case of Cervelo who btw, makes great bikes. But rather its hundreds of graphs and data sets sometimes with confounding relationships engineers anguish over because of the trade offs.

When Specialized rolled out its new Venge a few years ago, they explained why they designed it the way they did. It was precisely optimized for aerodynamics even though it is one of the most aerodynamic bikes on the planet. They created frame sections for an aero bike that gave the bike the character Spesh wanted in terms of vertical compliance versus sprinting capability out of the saddle with lateral stiffness. By contrast the extremely aero Cervelo S5 for example was the opposite. An amazing bike in a wind tunnel but pretty awful to ride day in and day out.

GlennR

I've been riding for 4 years. 1st year on my son's 2004 Trek 3700 MTB (a tank). Next, 3 years on a 2012 Madone 4.6c with Sram Rival that i added Easton 38mm wheels to after the 1st season. This past winter i upgraded to my current bike. I was really comfortable on the Madone and the Emonda had the same geometry so why change. I went "Project One" so I could build the bike the way I wanted it... minimal logos, Sram Red and carbon everything. The dealer gave me a super deal on the Zipp 303 and the fact that everything was black with a touch of red made it all seem like it was made as one part.

So far i've put 1500 miles on it this season and everytime I ride it i'm amazed how nice it is. I spent "stupid" money on the bike, but I see it as money well spent. When I see other bikes I just wish the riders are as happy with them as I am with mine.

StanSeven

I'm with you. I'm that way with bicycles and cars. I buy each with the intent thats it for a long time. Like you, I start looking again in a short time.

bt

men aren't genetically programmed to have just one bike. We need lots of others on the side.

GlennR

Odd... I bought a 74 VW brand new... it's sitting int he garage. I generally buy 6 year old cars and keep them for 10 years until they drop dead.

SevenTwentyNine

Oh trust me, it's quiet clear you have a rich and storied background in design, you've only been trying to shove it down my throat with every retort.

No doubt this bike is more about function than form - like, I get that, I-Really-Get-It ..... and I understand the purpose of almost everything they're doing with this frame shape.
It's like concept cars, just because it's ground breaking and proposing a paradigm shift to the status quo doesn't mean some conceptual designs aren't flat out fugly... kinda like this Madone and those awful POC helmets for example. If I wanted raw unadulterated speed I'd get a SpeedConcept 9.9 or a Shiv and put road bars on it and lower the saddle height a little. That probably still does a better aero job than this thing.

When I'm interested in saving a handful of seconds and also few watts over a 40km Time Trial or whatever against Sir Bradley Wiggins - which is really all this bike will do compared to most other bikes on the market today - then I'll care more about its function.

Doesn't mean I still can't call it fugly looking and doesn't mean you still can't love it for it's performance capabilities (and looks) .... there's a key distinction in that last sentence.

bigdo13

love the frame, not into that all-in-one bar and stem stuff they got going...

makeitso5005

You really are quite the demanding individual and that's a nice preemptive single minded retort!

So based on that spiel the Spec Venge should be near the top in comfort. Take a look again @ the Tour article on Cervelo's site. The Venge, S5 and the Noah Fast (both Venge and Noah are curved TT designs) are the only frames above the 3.7 N/mm frame comfort measurement and the bikes with the most horizontal top tubes are the ones who didn't max out the front fork measurement. So I know there's little point to continue this discussion as you've already made up your mind, but it's interesting to see that the logic behind your stout stance isn't backed up by the data available to the masses. You may have your inside connections to see the "hundreds of graphs and data sets sometimes with confounding relationships engineers anguish over" at all the brands but in the end it's all subjective per what the rider wants and feels. I get you thoroughly enjoy the Specialized design, but I'll just note that it's interesting that generalized frame testing and subjective ride testing may indicate otherwise. Subjective testing is just that... subjective, but push comes to shove that's what matters any given rider.

rudypyatt

I like it. But then I always have liked the look of the classic Schwinn cantilever cruiser frame: in profile, that's always made me think "leaf spring". I assume that this resemblance hasn't been lost on professional engineers.

As I understand it, in automotive applications, the significant problems with leaf springs come from the weight of using multiple leaves. Use something other than steel (tapered Fiberglas, as the Corvette does) and that issue goes away.

And so with bicycles. Cantilever frames have long been dismissed as too heavy, not appropriate for "road" or "serious" bicycles. I think that's leftover from the days of that shape turning up on 40lb, single-speed, coaster brake cruisers. With lighter materials( higher quality steels, aluminum, carbon fiber), that view can't hold up.

I think we're almost to the point where unapologetically full cantilever frames make the scene and become the norm. After all, with the profile of a spring it, that kind of frame should respond well to what amounts to "suspension tuning" (i.e., what auto and motorcycle engineers refer to as the "ride rate" of the spring) for vertical compliance.

It'll be interesting to see how the new Madone does in the pro peloton. Meanwhile, I'll consider the possibility of putting drop bars on an old cruiser...

SevenTwentyNine

Hey, he does it for a living and we don't, how could we ever go up against that kind of assertion ... ya know.... experts, experting stuff for us meek and humble laypeople.

gregf83 

BS. The new Madone was designed to sell as many bikes as possible. If the marketing dept can convince people like you it's the most advanced bike on the planet they've done their job. If people buy it because they like the looks, they've done their job.

Slackerprince

That head tube junction looks like it was molded/shaped by hand. Fugly, imo.
There are some very cool aspects of that bike, but it looks like a World Tour bike and not a daily rider, even for those with the $.
Personally, I think curved top tubes are cool looking. Straight tubes are cool, too.
I like to view a bike frame as a whole, and this new Madone just looks too prototype/experimental to me.

S

Slackerprince

Regarding the graphs and data:

Can't we get back to huffing and puffing and blowing the house down?


S

surgeonstone

Ugly with a capital U.

StanSeven

At least Trek didn't do anything really stupid like putting Speedplay pedals on it

WalksOn2Wheels

I think most of you are Missing Campag4Life's point, but to be fair, that's mostly because he's being slightly pushy about it.

What he's trying to say is that beyond the aero data alone, this bike is not a PURE aerodynamic bike and it isn't meant to be. That's why Trek still makes a TT bike. The earlier comparison of trying to save a few seconds vs. Wiggins in a time trial is a silly statement because a rider just wouldn't be on this bike. So even if there is a slight loss of aerodynamic effeciency using a curved top tube, the design is made to make the bike comfortable over the long haul. And comparisons to the Specialized Venge don't exactly hold up because while they both have curved top tubes, Trek has the Iso speed decoupler (which is kind of awesome if you've ridden one) which should make a pretty huge difference in rideability. I have met with a Specialized sponsored rider and he straight up told me he hated the Venge. He gets the things for free and he ended up getting rid of it and replacing it with the standard Tarmac.

So all this talk of the top tube and how aero or non aero it is really doesn't matter because it's a design trade that was made to make the bike more rideable in a day long race. With this sort of bike, you do everything you can to make it aero, but the sacrifice to make it as comfortable as possible. If they can hit that magic combo (and I'm thinking they will with an iteration of the iso speed decoupler on there) this is a sprinter's dream.

But hey, bottom line: if you think it's ugly, you don't have to like it. Chances are, you're happier with the Emonda if you like the older Madone.

A few other notes: I'm glad they got rid of the brake on the bottom bracket. That was an awful idea. Also, the one piece bars don't seem too outrageous. Looking at those pictures, you can see one has spacers on it. While the bars won't be adjustable in terms of angle, you should be able to get them in various "stem lengths" and the fork will have a set length of steerer that can be cut down, so it will be pretty "adjustable" so to speak.

The only thing I would really worry about, and the thing that was already mentioned: just working on the damn thing. The Speed Concept was an awful, awful bike to work on. It looks like the cables route through the bar AND the stem? What's up with that? I'll definitely have to give it a closer look when my local shop gets one.

EDT: Oh, NOW I see how it works. The steerer is actually a standard round shape. The aero profile only exists on the stem, spacers and "headset cap" if you want to call it that. So the steerer gets full coverage while the stem and spacers have a hollow airfoil at the front to route cables through. That's actually pretty nice. Not sure I'd want to do a cable swap on it still.

makeitso5005

My only question to that is IF it's for comfort, why are the bikes that sport the curved top tube design (Venge and Noah Fast) come out on the bottom of the comfort rating if it's not for aero benefit? That's the answer that can't be answered - or it's saying that without the curved top tube the ride would be absolutely rubbish... who knows. Additionally I think most of us are thinking of what we know for what makes bikes comfortable, like tube bends being more comfortable than linear designs (leaf spring-esque). Composites throw a big monkey wrench into that logic as you can completely change the characteristics of the exact same tube/wall shape just by changing the layup. With alloys on the bike you can't change the characteristics except by changing the shape but even then, you're fairly limited in what you can do as regardless of how it's extruded as it retains the same characteristics - unlike composites. But since this thread isn't about how aero stuff is or comfortable curved tube designs are... I'll leave it at that.

Overall I like the new Madone design but would like to see how the trickle down version will incorporate all of these design cues since I don't think many of us are going to buy the 9-series version. That handlebar looks too scary expensive for me!

Muffin Man

Some of you people are not very susceptible of change.

GlennR

Forget the name, do you want a traditional "road" bike or a "aero" bike.

Trek's current traditional "Road" bike is the Emonda, their "Aero" bike is not the Madone.

You don't see people whining over the Cervelo R series vs the S series.

So move on...

Campag4life

If you don't understand what you wrote in bold is patently false, then you really can't judge the design is the bottom line. I am not saying you are dense, you may have extraordinary talent in other areas but you just don't understand design and what excuses your judgment or vote.

An analogy to what you wrote about carbon lay up is....one of the simplistic posits made on the 41 all the time is...frame stiffness is pretty much irrelevant because a more compliant ride can be achieved with larger volume tires and lower pressure. This analogy to what you wrote may elude you however.

As it turns out there are two albeit unequal weight criteria for compliance. Geometry aka arch including asymmetric versus straight top tube...and...material properties. Your comment about dialing in desired ride characteristics with layup direction, thickness, fiber modulus etc, is perhaps 40% of the equation only...perhaps less. If you want proof of this, ride a Spec Tarmac and an Allez which share almost identical tube geometry but have radically different material...Allez being metal with non-isotropic material properties and yet they ride eerily similar because force/deflection throughout each have been tailored through well engineering tubing size, shape and thickness. Ultimate lateral stiffness and weight are the biggest differences between the two bikes but an Allez is a great race bike because of it geometry and not because of its material.

I hope you see the error of your ways. At the end of the day, tubing shape and thickness end up trumping material. In fact, one of the reason, that designers can't get the same level of performance out a steel or Ti bike as can be achieved with Al is because the tubes can't be formed with the level of asymmetry required to optimize the ratio of vertical to lateral stiffness.

WalksOn2Wheels

See Campag, you're just not going to win any friends with that tone of voice.

But I will point makeitso to the exact paragraph he quoted me on where I said that a direct comparison to the Venge dosen't hold up due to the fact that Trek has their Iso speed setup which makes a really big difference. Now as to the specifics of why they didn't hold up to a comfort test when directly compared to other aero bikes with a "traditional" top tube, I can't say.

I haven't ridden a Venge myself, but I have ridden a high end Roubaix Disc model at a SRAM demo. That thing was STIFF and it's supposed to be their endurance bike. I was shocked at how stiff it was. Granted this was one short ride and I have no idea what sort of tire pressure I was running, etc. but taking it on familiar roads, it felt very stiff. Not long after that, I bought a Domane. HUGE difference.

But yeah, this idea that carbon is a magical material that can give you any desired ride characteristic just by changing the layup regardless of shape is ridiculous. I don't know where people got that idea. If that were true, you wouldn't see the myriad of frame profiles you see on the market. All those various shapes of frames exist for a reason outside of aesthetics.

And I'll agree with oldnslow and say just ignore the name. Pretty much every major manufacturer has an aero bike, an endurance bike and a traditional bike. Decide what you want out of a bike and start from there.

Campag4life

My posts have no tone to be honest. I perhaps write directly because I am a scientist and most here aren't. I don't look through the lens of aesthetics other than function driving form. If form was the driving force behind design we would still be stuck in the art deco period of the 20's and 30's but society have moved on...largely driven by function. Formula 1 cars of the 50's were considered by some as the most beautiful and yet modern F1 cars which like hydroplane boats are not only much safer but 30% faster. It could be argued that bicycle of the 60's were the most elegant and beautiful with lithe narrow tube sections, 20mm sew ups and Super Record groupset. By comparison todays bikes look heavy and robotic even though they accelerate, ride, brake and handle far better than bikes many decades past. The new Trek taking a page from technical leader Specialized is simply raising the performance bar with their new frame shape based upon computer modeling and testing. I like the new Madone. It isn't in my demo per se because I prefer an endurance geometry but for the guys that have the fitness and flexibility to ride at 25mph a lot of the time, no doubt it will be a fantastic bike.

Looigi

I have not seen anything other than that one fuzzy pic of the new one, but it sure can't be any uglier than the current one.

Edonis13

As an owner of both, I will attest to this.