I certainly hope that's not supposed to be it

Good enough I guess, thanks

Well, it's not the whole reason for that result. I'm sure it's still be a very fast bike without that detail, it's just the edge that ekes out the top spot under tour protocol.

Yeah if the goal was the fastest bike for every day use just focus on round bottles. If you're an amateur racer though, you'll be using your own bottles more often than not and aero bottles are some of the best price-to-performance equipment choices.

Great work, though I have one complaint. Currently if a youtube link is detected, the video is automatically embedded. Would it be possible to make it like Weight Weenies where you can specifically select the option to insert a Youtube link and it will embed the video, but otherwise if you post it as a regular link it will be treated like a regular link?

Quote from: Dareios on October 26, 2026, 01:34:17 PMI think the Morpheus reppit shares a similar philosophy when it comes to the downtube being shaped around round bottles.

More than most, but not quite to the same degree as the Zenith. Most bikes with a deep bottom bracket junction and wide down tube have the DT transition almost directly into the BB. This often results in the DT profile being cut off at the widest part of the virtual airfoil where the tangent of the edge of the tube is parallel to the longitudinal axis.
You cannot view this attachment.
Where the the Zenith is somewhat unique in that the down tube is wider than the bottom bracket and the tangents of the rear edge point inwards. If you drew the profile for a whole unkammed section of the DT, the bottle would probably be contained fully inside it.
You cannot view this attachment.

Quote from: Dareios on October 26, 2026, 01:41:48 PMI do think that there is a point of diminishing returns. Also, if only the fork is super deep and the rest of the bike has rather narrow tubes (from a lateral view) I do wonder if it makes the front wheel/fork more vulnerable to crosswinds.
In the rear you have more weight to stabilize the bike more in the wind + if only the fork is really deep crosswinds have also more area to push the bike around at the front vs the whole bike.

But I guess that might also be the effect of getting fork rake/trail wrong (see Factor One and what I've heared also the Winspace M6).

The theory here could be similar as deep rim vs disc on the rear where putting a disc on the rear increases the total side force on the bike, but it also moves the center of pressure rearward behind the steering axis, reducing wind-induced steering moments and improving steering stability.

This could be taken a step further with the Factor One in particular, where the forward offset fork places virtually all of the fork's side area far in front of the steering axis. This could mean the local center of pressure on the fork is moved further forward from the steering axis, giving the same wind-induced side force greater leverage and producing greater steering moments.

This is why my fork has that slightly SL8-esque curve in the leading edge of the upper part of the fork. It's an attempt to move some side area away from the front.

The Zenith's big advantage is that it's basically the only bike Tour ever tested that fully committed to the round bottle. The lower half of the down tube is wide and shaped to direct air around a bottle (and the included very integrated bottle cage that it was also tested with). The bottle mounting section is also recessed to bring the bottle closer to the tube https://www.instagram.com/p/DVso5W7jBjL/. Almost every other bike ever made either ignores the aerodynamic contribution (detriment) of a round bottle, or acknowledges its existence but only half does something about it. In the past I would've been completely for doing it this way, but with the recent proliferation of aero bottles, it's become a slightly harder decision.

Another small thing is that it was tested with padding on the drops of the handlebars. This improves comfort while riding in the drops, but with the right shape, it can also improve aero performance, at least in the tunnel.

I imagine Merida had a lot of the same ideas about what they wanted their frame to be which led to convergence on some of the broad strokes (a not uncommon theme in modern bikes), but there was no intention to copy any part of Merida's design.

That said I've since made some Baldiso Zenith inspired tweaks (no pics cause the model's a bit broken right now).

I am afraid we might all be yelling into the void here, considering they've already done tooling and are in the prototyping phase

https://www.instagram.com/tagoola_matter/p/DeJTUkeyeDK/

Personally I'm looking for a 76° STA and a lot of reach. Probably 420 reach and 540 stack in my size. I'd compromise on a lot of things if a bike has good geometry. I won't compromise on geometry no matter how good the rest of it is.

some real guerrilla marketing in the account's other posts

PP Joe has hinted that there's a steep STA bike coming from china this year. I'm waiting ro see if that's any good.

The way you *might* get some OEM to make a bike like this is basically by doing as much free labour as you can for them. Market research showing there's interest in the concept, showing you have a platform to market the product, concept drawings, geometry tables, etc.

Quote from: patliean1 on October 08, 2026, 09:50:18 AM
LoL I was gonna call out Toxin. Hopefully he doesn't have frame design fatigue.

No worries there, its what I've spent most of my free time on this year and my interest has not diminished. But I set myself the challenge of creating a near production ready CAD model, which has required A LOT of learning to get my skills to the required level and the final V4 iteration is in the works now (pics).

For the topic of this discussion though, getting a carbon frame made from scratch is EXPENSIVE. I'm sure Sakizashi can tell you just what the challenges of getting your own carbon fiber product mass produced overseas are. Never mind the logistics of actually getting it out into people's hands.

just get whatever bike you like the look of and put a riser bar on

Quote from: Serge_K on September 17, 2026, 01:58:13 AM
Long Teng OEMs / has OEMed for Argon 18. It's a small brand that is / has been innovative. I suspect it's not too hard to copy their IP / get their CAD files if you're involved in the industry locally. Specialized, Pinarello, have IP lawyers (ineffective ones, it seems). I doubt a small Canadian brand that uses / used factories I can buy from myself has a legal team to go after IP theft in China, where the very concept of IP theft is quite new in the 1st place.

If i were Argon though, the fact that Yoyolele is now self identifying as a premium brand with Western aspirations would piss me off, because if you actually clear inventory at 3k a frame, your frame costs more than lots of legit Western frames. Yet your design was outright stolen.

I mean, you don't need CAD files or even a 3D scan to make something that looks roughly similar. Working from pictures and a geo chart is enough. Taking heavy inspiration from something isn't theft. This isn't a Tantan Tarmac replica situation where they're trying to make an exact copy of the shape.

Also funny to see them talk about the UCI 3:1 rule in the product page. It has been gone from frames for near a decade and almost half that everywhere else.

Quote from: pavlo.k on September 16, 2026, 03:24:25 AM
looks like argon nitrogen

wow they really copied the geometry to +-1 mm