# End of Madone Aero Frame?



## waterloo (Nov 8, 2005)

The whole Disco team seems to be riding the non-aero frame Madone's this season...at least from the recent pictures. Lance didn't really ride the aero frame much during the Tour. Clearly, it seems that the Madone aero frame is just a marketing gimmick. So is the Madone aero frame on the way out in the coming years?


----------



## WhiskeyNovember (May 31, 2003)

waterloo said:


> The whole Disco team seems to be riding the non-aero frame Madone's this season...at least from the recent pictures. Lance didn't really ride the aero frame much during the Tour. Clearly, it seems that the Madone aero frame is just a marketing gimmick. So is the Madone aero frame on the way out in the coming years?


The Madone aero frame definitely isn't a marketing gimmick. It's been proven to save 10 watts of energy, theoretically equating to a savings of an entire minute in a 200-km stage race.

The reason the Disco team doesn't use the frame is because the bike's aerodynamics aren't of major impact when racing in a pack or in the peloton.


----------



## cmatcan (Oct 6, 2005)

thats not true, whiskey. the aero is largely a marketing gimmick. trek approached lance with the aero frame originally and he was reluctant, so they designed him an SL type of frame for use in mountain stages. trek thinks the sl version is too boring compared with orbea, look, or even giant frames that have distinct cosmetics. i work at a trek dealer and have been told this by my trek rep, so its pretty dependable info. 
is there some substance to the aero idea? yes. but the fin on the seat tube, do you really think that has an impact??? very little. the most important feature is the shape of the top-tube/head-tube. of course if it were of that big of an advantage, don't you think the SL version would have an aero top-tube shape as well?


----------



## WhiskeyNovember (May 31, 2003)

cmatcan said:


> thats not true, whiskey. the aero is largely a marketing gimmick. trek approached lance with the aero frame originally and he was reluctant, so they designed him an SL type of frame for use in mountain stages. trek thinks the sl version is too boring compared with orbea, look, or even giant frames that have distinct cosmetics. i work at a trek dealer and have been told this by my trek rep, so its pretty dependable info.


While I'm sure your rep wasn't <i>lying</i> to you, my source is the gentleman who designed the frame. 

<br>


cmatcan said:


> the most important feature is the shape of the top-tube/head-tube. of course if it were of that big of an advantage, don't you think the SL version would have an aero top-tube shape as well?


The shape of the top tube and head tube on the "aero" frame is identical to that of the SL frame.


----------



## cmatcan (Oct 6, 2005)

WhiskeyNovember said:


> While I'm sure your rep wasn't <i>lying</i> to you, my source is the gentleman who designed the frame.  =QUOTE]
> Yeah, like the guy would admit that his design was largely motivated by a marketing gimmick, even if it were true. your source had motivation for what he said, mine had none. did you even read my post though? i said that there is definitely some underlying effectiveness to the design, but it is definitely overhyped. if aerodynamics were the most important thing, why isn't all of team CSC riding the soloist???


----------



## cmatcan (Oct 6, 2005)

p.s. i stand corrected about the head tube-top-tube, what i meant was the downtube, which is significantly thicker in parts on the aero version. between the little shark-fin and that small dip on the downtube, the thought of gaining major aerodynamic advantages is laughable, and the thought of it servinf more of a cosmetic purpose is much more reasonable.


----------



## CARBON110 (Apr 17, 2002)

I know more about Trek than the local Reps in the north East and South East......needless to say it wasn't a "gimmick" and the framset rides totally different than a 2004 5900 or pre Madone

This I attribute to the top tube and the seat stays not the fin. The ride of the Madone is far better than any of the 9 OCLVs I owned before it and I loved my 5900!

The fin protection of the rear wheel is minimal though but it is very aesthetic no doubt


----------



## cmatcan (Oct 6, 2005)

CARBON110 said:


> I know more about Trek than the local Reps in the north East and South East......needless to say it wasn't a "gimmick" and the framset rides totally different than a 2004 5900 or pre Madone
> 
> This I attribute to the top tube and the seat stays not the fin. The ride of the Madone is far better than any of the 9 OCLVs I owned before it and I loved my 5900!
> 
> The fin protection of the rear wheel is minimal though but it is very aesthetic no doubt


good points. we're comparing the 5.5's aero frame with the sl version though, both 06 models, we haven't been comparing them to the older models.


----------



## CARBON110 (Apr 17, 2002)

In that case then, the ride charachteristics between the SL model and the Madone 5.5 are not noticable. As far as performance goes, unless any of you are riding 200km races (pro,ca1,2) then get the one which you prefer aesthically


----------



## footballcat (Jul 8, 2004)

i would much rather own the sl then the normal

it just looks better


----------



## CARBON110 (Apr 17, 2002)

the difference between the two is the difference between pleated pants and .........


----------



## cmatcan (Oct 6, 2005)

CARBON110 said:


> the difference between the two is the difference between pleated pants and .........


exactly-thats been my point all along, and i don't know why it has met resistance. admittedly, the aero technology has some benefits, but i wouldn't go so far as to call them performance-enhancing. guess what, carbon bottle cages make your bike lighter. that make them performance-enhancing?? trek is concerned with making good bikes, and selling good bikes. it can never be undestimated just how much importance aesthetics and image play in bike sales.


----------



## CARBON110 (Apr 17, 2002)

werd~!


----------



## 3465mike (Dec 7, 2004)

interesting.......the aero madone is in fact, as previously stated proven to save a significant amount of time over a 200 K ride....this is due to the fact that the seat tube AND _down tube _ are hand shaped and aero....I suggest that the gentlemen who works at the TREK dealership compare an SL frame to an 06 5.5 or 5.2......the reason why the SL has become the standard high end TREK (5.9) is because it is *A* lighter, by about 100 grams and *B* stiffer. Lance didn't like the ride of the aero frame, because it is laterally less rigid than SL at the bb because of the aero tubes that comprise it...whereas the SL has a standard high modulus OCLV downtube and seatube that is round, and therefore physically more rigid....yes TREK eliminated the 110 5.9 aero in 06' because the SL was an improvement in weight reduction and improvement in stiffness, and it helped them to streamline the saturated OCLV menu. why keep the aero frame at all for the other models? good question.....it is instantly identifiable as a TREK when it goes by, and it does afford a "higher" end model in the line-up (5.2 SL)......it will be interesting to see if the frame stays around though in the future...it has to be more labor intensive to build the hand-formed down/seat tubes than the standard tube shape......regarding the head/top tube.....it's the same version on all madone frames....albeit in different GSM's...


----------



## CARBON110 (Apr 17, 2002)

ummm thanks for the recap. Alot of your post is actually speculation and not fact. Lets try to stick with the facts

No the Madone will not be around in production for more than a few years if that because Trek ahs never kept any model around long without some minor changes either in form/shape or carbon type

None of us here ride 200K races so again its a matter of aesthetics to the buyer and the difference in any stiffness or weight is not noticable AT ALL when actually riding the framsets

By the way the SSL is ab out 45 grams lighter for $2000 more - what a deal


----------



## cmatcan (Oct 6, 2005)

well, since you have to race for 200k to notice any kind of benefit from the aero technology, i'll be like lance and take my chances with the less fugly, lighter, sl version. thanks.


----------



## WhiskeyNovember (May 31, 2003)

CARBON110 said:


> ummm thanks for the recap. Alot of your post is actually speculation and not fact. Lets try to stick with the facts
> 
> No the Madone will not be around in production for more than a few years


Boy, if THAT isn't speculation, I don't know what IS. Do you have internal documents that outline Trek's manufacturing plans for the next few years? If not, well, pot-kettle-black. Stop the speculation and produce some facts, yourself.  




CARBON110 said:


> if that because Trek ahs never kept any model around long without some minor changes either in form/shape or carbon type


Making minor changes is a painfully obvious prediction, but it doesn't argue or support the theory that the Madone will be short-lived. 




CARBON110 said:


> its a matter of aesthetics to the buyer and the difference in any stiffness or weight is not noticable AT ALL when actually riding the framsets


This I agree with. There is a proven aerodynamic benefit to the aero Madone frame, but it's not an advantage that can be felt or sensed.




CARBON110 said:


> By the way the SSL is ab out 45 grams lighter for $2000 more - what a deal


Let's see....for $2000, you get the lighter SSL frame and an upgrade to the $2700, Race XXX-Lite carbon clincher wheelset. Plenty of people consider it to be a <i>great</i> deal, and in fact, the SSL is selling very well.


----------



## cmatcan (Oct 6, 2005)

WhiskeyNovember said:


> Boy, if THAT isn't speculation, I don't know what IS. Do you have internal documents that outline Trek's manufacturing plans for the next few years? If not, well, pot-kettle-black. Stop the speculation and produce some facts, yourself.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


i agree that the ssl is a decent deal....the sslx might be a bit more questionable.
the madone series is destined to end, and this is a fact. history provides us with all the proof we need. companies change the main line that they push based on new technologies, and if there are not any new technologies, they change the line they push anyways. new is better than old in the commercial world. that's just the reality of the situation.


----------



## WhiskeyNovember (May 31, 2003)

cmatcan said:


> the madone series is destined to end, and this is a fact.


I don't think anyone here has argued this fact. I certainly haven't.



cmatcan said:


> history provides us with all the proof we need. companies change the main line that they push based on new technologies, and if there are not any new technologies, they change the line they push anyways. new is better than old in the commercial world. that's just the reality of the situation.


The fact is, CARBON110 claimed that "will not be around in production for more than a few years". The Madone was first produced in 2004. It will continue to be produced in 2007. Based on the production length of the 5200-series, I predict the Madone's lifespan will be longer than "a few years".


----------

