QLOOKアクセス解析
2017年08月 / 07月≪ 12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728293031≫09月

--.--.-- (--)

スポンサーサイト

上記の広告は1ヶ月以上更新のないブログに表示されています。
新しい記事を書く事で広告が消せます。
--:--  |  スポンサー広告  |  記事編集

2010.11.30 (Tue)

1h 520kJ / Cervelo R3 2010 と R3/R5 2011の違い

(1)今朝は軽く1h 520kJのみ。前歯の欠損とあいまって、土日からちょっと消化器系に過負荷。あまり食べられず、回復が遅れている感じ。右ペダルシャフト延長、クリート厚調整による悪影響は今のところ観測されない。

(2)Cervelo R3 2010 と R3/R5 2011の違い

Cervelo 2010 R3
http://www.cervelo.com/en_us/bikes/2010/R3/geometry/

Cervelo 2011 R3
http://www.cervelo.com/en_us/bikes/2011/R3/geometry/

ジオメトリ変更についての説明のところ。 ちなみに、54サイズをよく見ると、ちょっとHTが伸びたが(+8mm)、フロント-センタ(F-C)やリーチは2010とほとんど一緒。変更の影響は、49と51(特にF-Cの延長、H-Tがスラックになった点)に顕著で、54以上はあまり変わってないような感じです。リア-センタは一律に6mm延長されてますが、これはなんだろうな。R3ってもともと乗り心地はいい方だとおもうので、重量バランスの調整かな。

一律HT延長はフロント剛性UPの理由もあるとのこと。

--------------------------------
The R3 and R5 have an updated version of this geometry, which finally suits both seasoned pros and regular riders alike. The solution is as simple as it is elegant. The main problem in most geometries is that bikes come with pretty short headtubes. Presumably this is done to appease the pros, but even for them the headtubes are now often on the short side. This explains why nowadays you mostly see stems with only a minus-6 degree angle in the peloton.
There are two issues with this:

1. You can imagine that if the headtubes are already short for the pros, they will feel REALLY short to regular riders.
2. Pros love maximum front-end stiffness, but - for the same handlebar height - a short headtube with a minus-6 stem provides less stiffness than a longer headtube with a minus-17 stem.

Enter Cervelo's new geometry for the R3 and R5. The headtube is slightly longer in most sizes, but they allow for the same low position as before if used in combination with a minus-17 stem (now available from our team partner 3T and also Ritchey). And for regular riders, the new headtube lengths with a standard minus-6 stem offer the slightly higher handlebar height most of us need. Of course those who ride low can still go with the minus-17.
The other adjustment of the geometry is in the headtube angle for the smaller sizes. As you may know, we have never been fans of slacker headtube angles on smaller sizes as they usually compromise handling through a combination of poor fork geometry and improper weight distribution, sometimes coupled with a lack of frame stiffness. On the other hand, we do realize that toe overlap remains an issue for some of our customers. So we spent some time figuring out how to get the best of both worlds, how to change the steering geometry and combine it with a longer chainstay length to get good handling out of a slacker headtube. We then had these new geometries tested by several Cervelo TestTeam riders, in particular our "engineer-in-the-saddle" Roger Hammond (who happens to ride a smaller size frame). The results showed that - we have to admit - we were a bit too quick to dismiss slacker headtube angles outright. If executed well (a big if), it can result in a very well-handling bike. To find out for yourself, try the R3 or R5 with the new geometry at your Cervelo retailer.
--------------------------------
12:36  |  未分類  |  トラックバック(0)  |  コメント(0)  |  記事編集

Comment

コメントを投稿する

Url
Comment
Pass  編集・削除するのに必要
Secret  管理者だけにコメントを表示  (非公開コメント投稿可能)
 

▲PageTop

Trackback

この記事のトラックバックURL

→http://tarmac2006.blog103.fc2.com/tb.php/1400-0a284bdc

この記事にトラックバックする(FC2ブログユーザー)

この記事へのトラックバック

▲PageTop

 | HOME | 
上記広告は1ヶ月以上更新のないブログに表示されています。新しい記事を書くことで広告を消せます。