Jump to content

The UCI drops the 3:1 tube ratio rule for race bikes.


Dieter ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

Recommended Posts

"The UCI code states that the ratio between the length and the width of equipment cannot exceed 3:1. This means that extreme aerodynamic tube shapes cannot be used in legal race bike frames, handlebars or other components and for years this rule has heavily influenced and restricted bike frame design."

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"The UCI code states that the ratio between the length and the width of equipment cannot exceed 3:1. This means that extreme aerodynamic tube shapes cannot be used in legal race bike frames, handlebars or other components and for years this rule has heavily influenced and restricted bike frame design."

 

Link?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

look like everything will become aero!!

 

 

Ignoring the wheels where positioning and profile are significant, what does it actually mean if a frame becomes twice as Aero ?

 

Surely what is important is the total aerodynamic improvement of the bike and rider?  As the rider has by far the biggest frontal area, where you position the rear brake must surely  be irrelevant.

Edited by eddy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

post-58906-0-24272700-1472821543_thumb.jpg

Ignoring the wheels where positioning and profile are significant, what does it actually mean if a frame becomes twice as Aero ?

 

Surely what is important is the total aerodynamic improvement of the bike and rider?  As the rider has by far the biggest frontal area, where you position the rear brake must surely  be irrelevant.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"The UCI code states that the ratio between the length and the width of equipment cannot exceed 3:1. This means that extreme aerodynamic tube shapes cannot be used in legal race bike frames, handlebars or other components and for years this rule has heavily influenced and restricted bike frame design."

Until someone cuts themselves on a really thin section of the frame and then they will be promptly banned again just like the disc rotors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bike manufacturers have ignored this UCI rule for years with their tri-specific bikes and this hasn't had a dramatic effect. 

 

Eg. the Spez Shiv TT (UCI legal) is probably faster than the Shiv Tri version (non-UCI legal), and top UCI legal TT bikes like the Cervelo P5, Trek and new Canyon Speedmax are probably still faster than most non-UCI legal ones.  Also the wacky frame shapes like beam bikes etc. seem to have serious stiffness issues, so what you might gain in aero you lose on stiffness.

 

By far the biggest factor is the rider profile, not the frame.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest-news/uci-set-to-scrap-rule-limiting-aero-bike-design-281563

 

Huge deal if it happens! Everything pre-2018 could be obsolete at high levels. 

Thanx. Informative.

 

Bike manufacturers have ignored this UCI rule for years with their tri-specific bikes and this hasn't had a dramatic effect. 

 

Eg. the Spez Shiv TT (UCI legal) is probably faster than the Shiv Tri version (non-UCI legal), and top UCI legal TT bikes like the Cervelo P5, Trek and new Canyon Speedmax are probably still faster than most non-UCI legal ones.  Also the wacky frame shapes like beam bikes etc. seem to have serious stiffness issues, so what you might gain in aero you lose on stiffness.

 

By far the biggest factor is the rider profile, not the frame.

 

If you watch the cyclingnews link above, I think it's pretty clear there is a definite benefit to aero frames.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Settings My Forum Content My Followed Content Forum Settings Ad Messages My Ads My Favourites My Saved Alerts My Pay Deals Help Logout