Etiquetas

viernes, 26 de abril de 2013

La guerra de los 2500 dolares!


2008 Cervelo P2C Ultegra, 2008 Felt B12, Quintana Roo Seduza, 2008 Kuota K-Factor

The high ground in the battle between triathlon bike companies is the $2500 price range. This is the smart person’s price point where the cost/benefit curve converges for maximum value. You can spend twice as much and your bike won’t be twice as good. You can spend $500 less and accept a host of compromises. Because of fierce competition between triathlon bike manufacturers the $2500 price level provides everything you’ll need to do your first triathlon and your first Ironman but without the fluff. It's the smart money first triathlon bike buy since you'll won't need to replace it.
Today's $2500 tri bike is better than bikes over $5000 from eight years ago. Frame designs and materials have improved, components have been updated and manufacturers’ understanding of triathlon bike geometry has improved resulting in better fitting and handling bikes in 2008/9 at lower prices.
2008 Cervelo P2C Ultegra, 2008 Felt B12, Quintana Roo Seduza, 2008 Kuota K-Factor
Several key benefits make $2500 the best value price point for a tri bike:
  • Molded, monocoque carbon fiber framesets provide the best ride quality, durability, bottom bracket stiffness, comfort and best frame aerodynamics. All the major competitors around $2500 use molded carbon fiber monocoque aerodynamic framesets.
  • Components are updated for 2008 with design cues from the most expensive, high end, Tour de France and Ironman winning component kits. These kits includes Shimano Dura-Ace and new Ultegra SL mixes developed with technology from Shimano’s flagship Dura-Ace components. As these components evolve into better versions, the performance gap narrows making the more value priced components the best performing at the best price with little or no compromises.
  • Since Shimano only makes one bar end shift lever, the Shimano Dura-Ace shifter, all bikes with shifters mounted in the tips of the aerobars, whether they are $9000 or $2500, use the same Shimano Dura-Ace shifter. This is especially important since the feedback to the rider from the shift comes from the shift lever. 
  • New frame geometries include a variety of reach and stack dimensions along with different head tube heights. Tri bike inventor Dan Empfield’s efforts to standardize bike fit comparison through stack and reach has helped manufacturers differentiate the way their bikes fit. The largest single factor differentiating bikes in this price category is the most important one: The way they fit. One of these bikes will likely fit better than the others. It is optimal bike fit that will provide the greatest benefit for the consumer. In short: Buy the one that fits best.
There are four popular bikes that populate the $2500 give-or-take price category. Some are a trifle over $2500 and some a trifle less. Price on bikes will vary depending on how you equip and fit your bike. These decisions change from one customer to another on the same bike depending on where you buy it.
For 2008 the four most prominent bikes around $2500 are Felt’s B12, Cervelo's P2C Ultegra, Kuota’s K-Factor and Quintana Roo’s Seduza. Kestrel also has an entry around $2500 with their Talon. With the sale of Kestrel to Fuji we anticipate spotty supply from Kestrel in the first half of 2008 effectively removing them from the value race. The Talon started life as a road bike and has been adapted for triathlon use, as such it features some compromises.
A quick word about prices: We are using generalities with prices on each of these bikes, lumping them into a category of plus/minus a few hundred dollars. Our website is so widely read and prices vary from region to region. Price is a matter you and your dealer will address. Rather than listing Manufacturers’ Suggested Retail Prices (MSRP) here for each bike we chose, for the sake of comparison, to refer to them each as “around $2500”.
The Bikes.
2008 Cervelo P2C Ultegra, 2008 Felt B12, Quintana Roo Seduza, 2008 Kuota K-Factor
Cockpit Specifications: Aerobars, Base Bars, Shifters and Brake Levers.
Of the four bikes two have “S” bend aerobars, two have ski bend aerobars. We’ve been critical of the of “S” bend aerobars and you can see why here. Because no one aerobar is right for all customers we consider aerobars an interchangeable feature that should be different for each customer, depending on fit. Ski bend cockpits make up most of what leaves our store since they are the most comfortable. The Quintana Roo Seduza and the Cervelo P2C Ultegra both use the same VisionTech ski bend aerobar, our favorite for most comfortable anatomical fit. The Felt B12 and the Kuota K-Factor use Profile’s T2+ “S” bend aerobar. Of the “S” bend bars this is the best because it is adjustable for length, pad width, and pad fore/aft. There is also a generous upward curve in the “S” that facilitates better comfort than flatter “S” bends. Both the Cervelo P2C Ultegra and Quintana Roo Seduza use the VisionTech wing shaped, aerodynamic base bar which looks nicer and is more aerodynamic than the round tubing base bars used on the Felt B12 and the Kuota K-Factor.
All bikes use the Shimano Dura-Ace 10 speed bar end shifter. Cervelo and Quintana Roo went cheap on the brake levers and the Dia Compe 188 levers are effectively obsolete. They don't have return springs and should be upgraded. There are enough new brake levers with return springs that the Dia Compe 188 is no longer a valid choice. The brake levers on both the Felt B12 and the Kuota K-Factor do have return springs and feel much better to use. If you fit best on a P2C Ultegra or QR Seduza, budget a few dollars to upgrade the Dia Compe 188 brake levers, they simply aren’t very good anymore in comparison to others available.
Despite the brake levers our two favorite cockpits are the Cervelo P2C Ultegra and the Quintana Roo Seduza.
2008 Cervelo P2C Ultegra, 2008 Felt B12, Quintana Roo Seduza, 2008 Kuota K-Factor
Frame Features: Head Tube/Fork/Top Tube/Down Tube Area.
Lots of differences in design philosophies here: Some necessitated by actual design and performance and others dictated by manufacturing constraints.
Two designs rise to the top: The Cervelo P2C and Felt B12. These are the two most aerodynamic of the four bikes, with both being extensively wind tunnel tested and adapted. Both are excellent, and both approach aerodynamics in a different way.
Cervelo relies heavily on a very narrow head tube width and a rounded profile so no flat surface hits the wind. Felt has a wider head tube (advantage: Cervelo) but does do an admirable job of smoothing the union between the fork crown and the down tube for a smooth air flow. Both of these designs work well at low yaw angles, but the Cervelo is likely slightly better due to the narrower, smaller overall frontal area and rounded profile.
As the wind yaw angle increases it is likely the aerodynamic performance gap between the two bikes may narrow, although the overall frontal area of the Felt is slightly greater than the Cervelo as you can see in the photos.
Cable routing is better on the Felt, not only aerodynamically but mechanically. Felt has the best internal cable routing in the industry- mechanically and aerodynamically. Cervelo’s cable routing is good as is Kuota’s, but the Seduza requires extra attention to prevent the ends of the cable housing from slipping inside the frame.
Fit on the bikes is different at the head tubes also- the big differentiation between all four. Head tube heights on the 54cm frame sizes (Medium on the Seduza and K-Factor) range from a low of 110 millimeters on the Felt B12 and Quintana Roo Seduza to a nice middle ground of 120 millimeters on the Cervelo P2C up to 135 millimeters on the Kuota K-Factor. The bike with the greatest flexibility here is the Cervelo P2C Ultegra, which goes right down the middle. It’s a good choice from sprint to Ironman. People with a bias toward higher bars will be attracted to the high head tube on the Kuota K-Factor.
The four forks show different aero profiles and construction techniques. Felt scores high marks on its B12 for using a lightweight, full carbon fiber fork with integrated carbon fiber steer tube. It is the lightest fork of the four. The Wolf TT fork on the Cervelo is an efficient and proven aerodynamic design that uses a somewhat heavier and very reliable carbon fiber blade assembly with aluminum crown and steer tube. The fork on the K-Factor is a 350 gram all carbon fiber steer tube fork with aluminum dropouts. The Seduza uses a carbon fiber steer tube also, the original shape going back to the first bladed, carbon fiber aerodynamic fork called the Quintana Roo “Carbonaero”. The Cervelo P2C Ultegra uses an aluminum crown and steer tube and is the heaviest of the four forks.
2008 Cervelo P2C Ultegra, 2008 Felt B12, Quintana Roo Seduza, 2008 Kuota K-Factor
Frame Features: Down Tube/ Top Tube Area.
Down tube shapes are a battle ground for bike companies. The fight is decided in the wind tunnel and Cervelo is the winner. What we’re reporting here is based on two separate trips to the wind tunnel by us and published wind tunnel data from two different manufacturers. While the reliability of wind tunnel results by manufacturers is suspect due to the sales motive, both of these tests (even from competing manufacturers) reveal similar findings as did motion flow analysis.
Cervelo wins with Felt in second and the others far behind. Cervelo’s rigid adherence to truly aerodynamic shapes and narrow tubes gives them an edge with their down tube design, the same shape down tube used on their flagship P3C. The down tube has the best aspect ratio, shape and profile for bicycle speeds. The Felt B12 is also a valid aerodynamic design and gives a nod to structural concerns by making the bottom bracket flare out a trifle to improve bottom bracket stiffness. Felt’s integration of their down tube into the fork crown is the best design of the four, but Cervelo’s overall front end aerodynamics win out- slightly. Cervelo’s bottom bracket also flares for added stiffness, but it does it internally where you (and the wind…) can’t see it. This design is not as conspicuous and may not look as cool, but it does produce lower drag numbers by maintaining the overall narrow shape of the frame.
The design of the K-Factor lags aerodynamically as Kuota put their primary aerodynamic emphasis on their excellent Kalibur and new Kueen K. The K-Factor is a stiff, durable, comfortable design but doesn’t have the aerodynamic benefits of either the Cervelo P2C Ultegra or the Felt B12. The Quintana Roo Seduza is an aerodynamically styled bike that is more aerodynamic than round tubes or the K-Factor but still behind the sophisticated shapes of the Cervelo P2C and the Felt B12. By Quintana Roo’s own admission the Seduza was not designed with wind tunnel input. The next generation of Quintana Roos are being designed in the wind tunnel.
The winners here are Cervelo’s P2C Ultegra with the B12 nipping at its heels and the Kuota K-Factor taking the hindmost with the Quintana Roo Seduza between them. As we’ll see though, these bikes redeem themselves later…
2008 Cervelo P2C Ultegra, 2008 Felt B12, Quintana Roo Seduza, 2008 Kuota K-Factor
Frame Features: Seat Tube Profile and Wheel Cut-Out.
The smooth reassembly of air behind the rider is important to aerodynamics so the design of the back of the bike is important even at speeds below 20 M.P.H. Most manufacturers have gone to an airfoil shaped seat tube with a wheel cut out to optimize aerodynamics, or at least style their bike to look like it does. It is important to differentiate between genuine aerodynamic benefits derived from testing and designs that are simply aero styled.
Each of the four bikes uses some type of wheel cut-out. The Felt B12 takes the concept one step further by moving the rear brake to the top of the chainstays creating a cleaner profile at the rear of the Felt B12. It’s difficult to imagine how much of a drag savings this is, but easy to imagine it is some drag savings. This design facilitates lower angular placement of the seat stays on the B12, making them more aerodynamic and produces a wheel cutout that sits closer to the rear wheel for improved drag reduction. It follows the radius of the rear wheel for the length of the seat tube. This is an elegant design. The Felt B12 wins here with Cervelo’s Ultegra P2C a close second and, you guessed it, the other two farther back in design sophistication.
An interesting note on the design philosophies of Felt and Cervelo: If you want to own Cervelo’s most advanced, lowest drag frame shape it is their flagship P3C at $4500. The $1500 less expensive Dura-Ace equipped version of the P2C and the $2000 less expensive P2C Ultegra use a different frame shape at the rear end than the P3C. If you want Cervelo’s best aero frame shape you have to buy their most expensive aerodynamic triathlon bike, the P3C. Felt uses the same frame shape (but a different fork system) on their $9499 Felt DA flagship tri bike as they do on their (about) $2500+ Felt B12. That is some impressive trickle down. There is a catch to this deal, and that is the Cervelo P3C, Cervelo’s most aero shape, is likely even moreaerodynamic than the Felt DA/B2/B12 frame shape. However, overall aerodynamics of the P2C Ultegra and the B12 may nearly be a wash- at least as far as the frame is concerned.
The wheel cut outs on the Seduza and the K-Factor are more styling cues than functional aerodynamic designs.
2008 Cervelo P2C Ultegra, 2008 Felt B12, Quintana Roo Seduza, 2008 Kuota K-Factor
Cranks and Bottom Bracket Designs.
The original spec for three of the bikes include the FSA Gossamer Crank and Mega-Exo sealed cartridge bearing bottom bracket. Very early versions of the Cervelo P2C Ultegra were shipped with FSA SLK carbon fiber cranks to facilitate early shipment of the bikes to dealers but the majority of those SLK equipped bikes are off dealer floors and in consumer hands so it is back to the FSA Gossamer aluminum crank. The Gossamer is an excellent crank and has actually been used by riders in the Tour de France. Since three of the four bikes use this crank there isn’t much to compare here.
The fourth bike, the Kuota K-Factor, has the nicest of the cranks with a Shimano 105 crankset and Shimano sealed cartridge bottom bracket.
2008 Cervelo P2C Ultegra, 2008 Felt B12, Quintana Roo Seduza, 2008 Kuota K-Factor
Seat Stay, Chain Stay, Rear Drop Out Assemblies.
The Kuota K-Factor is the only bike of the four that uses an easily replaceable rear derailleur hanger. This is a practical feature if you flight case your bike frequently and protects it against permanent frame damage from transition area knock-downs. If your rear derailleur hanger becomes bent or stripped on the Kuota K-Factor you can simply unbolt the damaged one and replace it with a new one. On the other three bikes damage to the rear derailleur hanger could mean returning the frame to the manufacturer for repair or replacement. That said, non-replaceable derailleur hangers are near standard in the tri bike industry now owing to the necessity of rear-facing dropouts with rear wheel cut-outs and the need for narrow dropouts for better aerodynamics. This change hasn’t created a culture of easily damaged frames.
The chainstays on the Cervelo P2C Ultegra and the Kuota K-Factor are the most robust with the Cervelo getting an edge not only for shape but construction. Paired with their narrow, aerodynamic seat stays the Cervelo rear end is well designed. The seat stays on the Felt B12 are elegant and aero but the chainstays a trifle frail in appearance. Quintana Roo’s Seduza strikes a balance between strength, comfort and stiffness with a nod to aerodynamic styling using a molded, wishbone seat stay assembly with a Coke bottle type curve. This is a Serotta inspired design we see quite a bit of because it works for taking the edge off road shock.
The combination of nice, narrow aerodynamic seat stays and chunky, rotationally stiff chainstays make the back of the Cervelo the winner here. Kuota’s K-Factor does a nice job of shoring up the rear end but at a cost to aerodynamics and weight. The Felt B12 and the Seduza nestle behind these two designs on rear end integrity.
2008 Cervelo P2C Ultegra, 2008 Felt B12, Quintana Roo Seduza, 2008 Kuota K-Factor
Overall Appearance, Finish and Paint Quality: The “Popular Vote”.
If you try to deny that appearance is a factor in the bike you buy I’d suggest you are either boring or less than honest. Everyone has their own tastes in aesthetics and we decided to find out what they were. We asked 40 customers over three weeks which one of the bikes they found “Most Attractive”. Customers were afforded the ability to see all four bikes in person in similar frame sizes to represent similar aesthetic proportions. A whopping 18 customers said the Felt B12 was the “Most Attractive” bike of the group. The Cervelo P2C Ultegra followed at 12 votes with 8 people naming the Quintana Roo Seduza as “Most Attractive” and only 2 for the utilitarian looking (but solid) Kuota K-Factor.
These four bikes lack color entirely except for the Quintana Roo Seduza. It is obvious manufacturers were not willing to take chances with the color schemes on these important price category bikes so they went conservative.
If you look carefully at finish work the Felt B12 is meticulously finished with nice clear coat, good graphics and an overall very polished look. While people reacted with mixed feelings to the racy, modern graphics of the Quintana Roo Seduza the matt finish work is very clean and nice with no errors, crooked graphics or finish flaws. We do like the Seduza graphics also. The Kuota K-Factor was also well finished with good graphics, a glossy clear coat and nice finishes where frame shapes ended. The Cervelo P2C Ultegra has a nice color scheme and bold, well designed graphics that stand out from a distance (like in your race photos). This paint scheme compliments the truly aerodynamic lines of the Cervelo P2C Ultegra. Paint quality is good and has improved steadily for Cervelo as it didn’t used to be their strong point. Apparently they were too busy making the bikes fast to spend much time on paint quality. That has changed and Cervelo’s new finishes are top notch. There can be some finish irregularities where the rear dropouts meet the carbon fiber frame members at the seat stays and chainstays.
Component Kit Comparison.
Firstly, it’s important to realize the difference between Ultegra and Dura-Ace never won anyone a race. Changing your rear derailleur doesn’t make you faster. For detailed analysis of the real difference between Shimano derailleurs go here. You’ll be surprised to learn how little difference the components really make. Since each of these bikes are within a few hundred dollars of the same price there simply isn’t enough price difference to build much component differentiation into them.
There is one exception, and it is a significant one. The wheels on the Felt B12 are the Felt proprietary TTR 3 deep section aerodynamic wheels. They feature a 40 mm deep alloy aerodynamic rim section and 20 bladed, radial spokes in the front with 24 cross 2 bladed spokes in the rear. This wheelset isn’t particularly light, but it is particularly fast in comparison to the much less aerodynamic wheels on the other three bikes. Cervelo, Quintana Roo and Kuota spec their three offerings with a training type wheel and presume you’ll upgrade to a more aerodynamic race wheel later at additional cost. The TTR 3 wheels on the Felt B12 do double duty as race wheels and every day wheels. That adds tangible value to the Felt B12. If you evaluate the entire aerodynamic package of the bikes with all components this wheelset puts the Felt B12 ahead of all three other bikes on overall aerodynamics. This really is the only tangible component difference between all of the bikes that actually will produce a performance benefit.
For the specifics on parts spec and for the buyer who insists on spread sheet comparisons here you go:
Cervelo P2C Ultegra
Felt
B12
Quintana Roo Seduza
Kuota
K-Factor
Aerobar
VisionTech Alloy Ski BendProfile Design T2+ "S" BendVisionTech Alloy Ski BendProfile Design T2+ "S" Bend
Shifters
Shimano 7800 Series Dura-Ace 10 Speed Bar EndShimano 7800 Series Dura-Ace 10 Speed Bar EndShimano 7800 Series Dura-Ace 10 Speed Bar EndShimano 7800 Series Dura-Ace 10 Speed Bar End
Base Bars
VisionTech Alloy Wing26.0mm Round Alloy Base BarVisionTech Alloy WingProfile T2 Alloy Base Bar.
Brake Levers
Dia Compe 188Tektro RX4.1 with return spring.Dia Compe 188Profile QS 2 with return spring
Stem
VisionTech SizemoreFELT 3.2 CNC Machined 6061 Aluminum, Ø26.0mm with 0° rise.VisionTech SizemoreProfile H2OS Stem
Fork
Wolf TT 1&1/8" Alloy steer tube.NEW Felt 3.1 Airfoil Carbon Fiber Bladed with carbon 1" steerer, crown, and fork bladesQR Full Carbon Tri Specific Fork 1&1/8"Kuota Fork 1-1/8 Alloy Steer
Bottom Bracket
FSA MegaExoFSA Mega EXOFSA Mega ExpoShimano Sealed Cartridge
Front Derailleur
Shimano UltegraShimano Ultegra SLShimano UltegraShim Ultegra
Rear Derailleur
Shimano UltegraShimano Ultegra SLDura Ace 7800Shimano Ultegra
Crank
FSA Gossamer MegaExoFSA Gossamer PRO MegaExoFSA Gossamer MegaExoShimano FC-R 550
Brakes
Cervélo Mach 2Dual Pivot w/Cartridge Pads, Stainless Hardware, Teflon BushingsTektroShimano 105
Chain
Shimano UltegraShimano 5600Shimano 5600Shimano 5600
Cogset
Shimano Ultegra 12-25TShimano Ultegra 11-23TShimano 5600 11-23TShimano 105 Cassette 12-25T
Wheelset
Shimano R-500Felt TTR-3 700c 40mm Deep Aluminum with CNC Machined Braking Surface, 20H Front/24H RearAlex 320Fulcrum Racing 7 Clincher
Tires
Vittoria Diamante Pro Slick Folding 700c x 23cVittoria Rubino PRO Slick Folding 700c x 23cContental Ultra Race 700 x 23cVittoria Zaphiro Pro Tire Black 700 x23c
Saddle
Cervélo TT Special by Selle Italia.Felt 3.2 Tri/TT Saddle with Carbon Injected base, Gel Nose, Custom Waterproof Cover with Carbon Fiber Inserts and Extended Length Hollow Chrome Moly railsQuintana Roo Triathlon Specific.Kuota San Marco Azoto Saddle


2008 Cervelo P2C Ultegra, 2008 Felt B12, Quintana Roo Seduza, 2008 Kuota K-Factor
Seatpost/Binder Bolt/Saddle Clamp.
Of the four bikes two have variable geometry seatposts, the Cervelo P2C Ultegra and the Felt B12. This provides the widest possible range of saddle fore/aft positions and enables the rider to sit steeper with a more open torso to leg angle. For this reason the P2C Ultegra and B12 have the widest "fit band" and are most adjustable.
The saddle clamp on the Cervelo P2C is the best design. It is the easiest to adjust with a single, standard sized allen wrench. All three other systems use hardware under the saddle that is fumbly to reach and work on.
The integrated binder bolt assembly on the Cervelo P2C is the most aerodynamic design but you do need exercise reasonable care when adjusting saddle height. If the threaded inserts in the frame itself became stripped the frame would likely have to be returned for repair.
From a durability perspective the Felt B12 binder bolt is excellent. If a ham-fisted mechanic stripped the binder bolt the entire assembly can be quickly replaced. This is also true of the QR Seduza and Kuota K-Factor.
It isn't worth talking much about saddles since that is an interchangeable item at the time of the fit based on rider preference. I've ridden each of these, and they are all at least good as stock saddles.
2008 Cervelo P2C Ultegra, 2008 Felt B12, Quintana Roo Seduza, 2008 Kuota K-Factor
Fit, Geometry, Size Run and Positioning.
We saved the most important consideration for last. The single biggest determining factor in your ownership experience is how well your bike fits you.
You could achieve the same position (provided it wasn’t excessively low in the front end) on a similar frame size on each of these bikes- but they still wouldn’t fit you the same way. Chances are one of these four bikes will be the optimal fit based on your riding goals, level of experience, pedaling style, body shape and torso to leg length proportions compared to the other three. These are the factors that will decide which one is best for you. Especially if you are a short torso, long leg rider one of these bikes will suit you significantly better than the other three.
The Felt B12 and the Cervelo P2C both have the capability to go the steepest with effective seat tube angle of the four bikes. These two bikes use a widely adjustable Variable Geometry Seatpost design which facilitates a wide fit band. The Felt B12 and Cervelo P2C Ultegra will fit more people with more positional options than the Kuota K-Factor or the Quintana Roo Seduza since those two bikes use fixed position seatposts with much less fore/aft adjustment. This is a critical ability since steeper effective seat tube angle means a more relaxed, open angle between torso and femur translating to an overall more comfortable position. This can also make a bike more versatile, enabling the rider to evolve toward a lower front end position as they gain experience. On fit and position the Cervelo P2C Ultegra and the Felt B12 are the winners because of their variable geometry seatposts.
The Kuota K-Factor had the shortest reach and highest stack per frame size along with the slackest seat tube angle making it an excellent choice for problem fit, short torso, long leg (femur) riders. For some riders in this category, the K-Factor is absolutely the best option in their fit range and other bikes would be a serious fit compromise. This is combined with the highest head tube also working well with the long leg, short torso crowd.
The Quintana Roo Seduza is another good shortish reach option a few millimeters shorter per size than the Cervelo P2C Ultegra and the Felt B12. The Seduza also has the highest seat tube extension, a feature that may further benefit the long-legged rider.
If you are average or to the long-torsoed, the statistical majority of cyclists, then you will be a Cervelo P2C Ultegra or Felt B12 customer. There are small differences in the stack and reach, both of which equate to barely a full stem size (1 cm.) change. Head tube heights are different by 1 cm or one headset spacer with the Cervelo P2C Ultegra having the higher trend.
Stack & Reach Comparison for 54 cm ("Medium") size Range
StackReachHead TubeSeat Angle
Cervelo P2C Ultegra
51.2 cm.41.8 cm.120 mm.78° V.G
Felt
B12
51.0 cm.41.5 cm.110 mm.78° V.G
Quintana Roo Seduza
51.4 cm.40.8 cm.110 mm.77° F.G
Kuota
K-Factor
53.6 cm.40.2 cm.135 mm.76° F.G
F.G. = Fixed Seatpost Geometry
V.G. = Variable (Adjustable Seatpost Geometry)

So, Which Bike is Best?
That’s an easy question to answer: The one that fits you best. That said, several of these bikes could support identical rider positions if set up correctly. The decision of which bike is best for you will be a matter for you and your bike fitter to decide. If you read the article carefully you do see the Cervelo P2C Ultegra and Felt B12 both seem to consistently offer fit, aerodynamic and even component benefits that rise above the others. This trend has also manifested itself on the sales floor- those are the two most commonly purchased bikes of the four.
All four of these bikes represent a level of performance, durability, function, fit and value that has never been available anywhere near this price. About $2500 is a bargain for such sophisticated racing machines that would have been impossible to produce at any price only a decade ago. These bikes will enhance the triathletes enjoyment of the sport and make participation in the sport easier, more comfortable, safer and faster than ever thought possible at around $2500 for a high performance, carbon fiber, aerodynamic triathlon specific bike.
2008 Cervelo P2C Ultegra, 2008 Felt B12, Quintana Roo Seduza, 2008 Kuota K-Factor

Cervelo P2 Dual --- The Cervelo´s secret (My bondie bike is best than this) :P



What is the secret to Cervelo’s success? Why do people want these bikes so badly? How did they become so successful and sought after in only a few years when other companies, most much larger, have not been able to capture this segment of the market nearly as well?
There are a lot of major bike companies looking for the answers to those questions. One place they need to look is the Cervelo Dual.
With its precise synergy of performance and value the Cervelo Dual is a “customer’s bike”. The perfect mix of high performance and value priced features. When compared nut to bolt with everything else available it is apparent the Dual is a best buy.
The Cervelo Dual is such a devastating “category killer” that American Tri magazine named it “Editor’s Choice” as the best buy under $2000. But that is not even a fair assessment. The Cervelo Dual is not a $1999.99 bike just under the $2000 ceiling. The Dual is fully 21% under $2000 at $1599.99. No matter what you compare it to, the Cervelo Dual is a bargain.
Price notwithstanding the Dual is an impressive achievement for any bike company. How did Cervelo do it?
The design team of White and Vroomen started Cervelo doing exactly what they do best: Design time trial bikes. For most bike companies time trial and triathlon bikes are a niche of a niche. They amount to a very small part, if any, of their business. Cervelo was founded on that niche. An afterthought for most companies; it is the foundation of Cervelo. That is why they do triathlon bikes so well. As we pointed out over a year ago when we first reviewed Cervelo’s excellent P2K, Cervelo has more time trial and triathlon-oriented frames in their line-up than any other company.

Cervelo's frames are the cornerstone of their success with their proprietary aerodynamic bladed Smartwall 2 differentially butted down tube and unique geometry.
It has been by providence and good luck that the market found Cervelo. I doubt that Cervelo insiders did an empirical survey of the demographics of cycling and predicted that triathlon would be the largest growing category in 2002 and 2003. That part was luck. The rest isn’t. It is good engineering.
Cervelo is not an overnight success. Now 9 years old, a virtual epoch in the bike industry, the company has already rocketed to the number three bike in Kona at the Ironman World Championships. It is likely the only reason they are not number one is because the people with the top two bike brands have not been able to unload their bikes. The growth rate of Cervelo at Ironman, and all triathlons, has been astronomical. Most Cervelos on the pier in Kona are under two years old, and people keep buying them. They absolutely leapfrogged over other companies many times their size. Cannondale, Litespeed, Quintana Roo, Specialized, Softride- all of them were there first and all of them fell to Cervelo. And they keep falling. Customers want Cervelos, and they want them for good reasons. The honeymoon for Cervelo ended years ago, but the marriage is solid. The reasons the bikes continue to sell is that, when you compare them to what else is out there, they are usually the best. Also, the wide fit band, or versatility of fit, positions them as the odds on favorite that a Cervelo will fit you. Functionally speaking, no company makes more frame “sizes” than Cervelo. Their sizing is like a Swiss army knife: It comes closer to doing everything than any other brand.
Success for Cervelo comes from good engineering. The bikes are not basic, they are all exotic designs, but they are functional exotics. If you look carefully at the Cervelo lineage they have evolved and learned carefully from previous models. When Cervelo does something that works, they keep it. Model year on model year shows a succession of refinements rather than complete redesigns. The Dual is a perfect example.
The Cervelo Dual uses several key features found in other Cervelo models:
  • The Smartwall 2 NACA profile aerodynamic downtube.
  • The Variable Geometry Seatpost design.
  • The proprietary rear end and front-end frame geometry and dimensions that enable the Variable Geometry Seatpost design to work, when it has failed on other brand bikes.
  • The lowest head tube heights in the industry to facilitate a truly aerodynamic body position.
  • Simple, reliable parts specifications that require little or no upgrade even for Ironman distance races.
Taken one at a time:
The NACA downtube profile was refined in the wind tunnel and features the most advanced aerodynamic profile commonly available on any bicycle. It is the foundation of Cervelo aerodynamic frames, and no one else has it. While estimates of the time savings afforded by the Smartwall 2 NACA profile bladed aero downtube vary, there is no doubt the aero downtube makes the bike faster. Some wind tunnel tests have claimed the fortified aerodynamics of a Cervelo frame will save about 1 minute over a conventional round tube frame over 40 kilometers at a specific speed. The profile of the tube was designed in the wind tunnel; it is a result of wind tunnel testing. Most other companies design their aero tubing then take it to the wind tunnel, not the other way around. As a result of the sharp trailing edge and unusual chord ratio (width to depth) special tubing had to be designed. Smartwall 2 tubing uses differential butting inside the tube to reinforce the tube and provide exceptional strength and shock damping.

Shortened chainstays are one feature that make the Cervelo work with the variable geometry seatpost.
When you first see a Cervelo Dual with its straight seat stays and deep section, aero downtube you may think it will have a stiff ride. Even with 120 psi in the tires the ride quality is incredibly comfortable. This is due partially to the thicker sides of the Smartwall tubing dispersing high frequency road shock energy before it reaches the rider. You simply feel the bumps less. No other company is doing this. Another interesting design element with the Dual and other Cervelos are the “wiggle” shaped chainstays. There is an odd detour in the chainstays immediately behind the bottom bracket. This set of curves accomplishes a number of functions: It contributes to ride comfort. It negates the need for an indentation in the right chainstay for chainring clearance and maintains the structural integrity of the rear triangle. It maintains the original profile of the chainstay for its entire length on both sides of the rear wheel, this helps keep the rear end of the bike laterally stiff so you transfer drive forces more efficiently, but makes the rear end more vertically compliant so it rides better and you feel bumps less. You are faster on a Cervelo because you are more comfortable and more aerodynamic.
It is worth noting that this is the same downtube used on the flagship Cervelo P3 that took the Ironman world by storm in 2001 when they won four Ironmans, followed by another four Ironman victories in 2002. In some cases, professional triathletes had to buy Cervelo P3s when other companies were offering them free bikes. It isn't a fluke. Top pros know the Cervelo is the fastest frame. From Steve Larsen to Lothar Leder, the fastest Ironmans have been on Cervelo. That makes the Dual an even greater bargain. No other bike company is using their highest end tubing throughout their line. Cannondale used to do it but stopped for the 2004 model year. If you want their flagship "Slice" multisport frame (not even available as of this writing) now it is only sold as a frameset or a complete bike at around $2500, nearly $1000 more than the Cervelo Dual.

A good view of just how aero the Smartwall 2 downtube is.
The variable geometry seatpost design is not a new concept. Aftermarket companies like Profile and Sugino have made forward facing seatposts to shorten the reach and artificially position a cyclist’s pelvis in closer vertical proximity to the bottom bracket. The problem is, forward seatposts on a standard road bike create more problems than they solve. Simply shoving the saddle forward when using aerobars puts too much weight on the front wheel causing steering to be hyper-responsive. This also makes the ride quality horrible in most cases. For a forward oriented seatpost to work correctly the frame has to be purpose built to work with it. Cervelos are. And they are the only ones.

The famous Cervelo Variable Geometry seatpost and seat tube.
So why does it work on a Cervelo? I asked Cervelo engineer Gerard Vroomen that question at Dan Empfield’s Xantusia desert compound near Edward’s Air Force Base in the California desert. Vroomen wasn’t talking: “If I said how we did it, then everyone would do it…” In measuring a Cervelo Dual it appears relatively unremarkable, but there are enough subtle differences to account for major advantages in handling when configured with the saddle all the way forward. The bike remains stable and corners well. Ride comfort is still excellent. However Vroomen and White accomplished this, it works.
We did some investigative journalism with a tape measure to try to discover why a Cervelo Dual works with a variable geometry seatpost and other bikes, like the Kestrel Talon or a road bike with the seat pushed forward, do not work nearly as well. It didn’t take much investigation to uncover the “Cervelo conspiracy” of aerodynamic and comfortable position design.
First we measured seat tubes on four popular triathlon bikes in our store: A 2004 Cervelo Dual, a 2004 Cannondale Ironman 800, a 2004 Felt S25 and a Quintana Roo Kilo. We selected sizes that all had an effective seat tube dimension of within 5mm of 50.5 cm. It is also interesting to note that the manufacturer’s “names” of these sizes ranged from a low of “49 cm.” to a high of “52 cm” for the size names. That is an example of how misleading size names can be.
Having measured these parameters and established a baseline we used a laser to measure the actual, effective straight-line chainstay length of each of these bikes. Well I’ll be darn, Cervelo was shortest by a centimeter or more. It was over two centimeters shorter than some.
Simply put the Cervelo variable geometry seatpost works on Cervelo because they position the rear wheel farther underneath the mounted rider’s center of gravity. Unlike a traditional bike with a forward seatpost retrofitted the weight distribution on the Cervelo Dual, P2K, Soloist Team, Soloist 105 and flagship P3 remains excellent and correctly distributed even with the seat forward due to the shorter chainstays. Simple. And no other company is doing it.
If you have trouble visualizing this think of it like this: A big cargo airplane is carrying a load of elephants. As long as the elephants stay near the middle of the airplane while it is flying the center of gravity remains centered and stable, allowing the airplane to handle easily and predictably. Should the elephants suddenly decided to walk forward in the airplane it forces weight forward and the nose down, forcing the pilot to not only compensate for the horizontal angle of the airplane, the “angle of attack” but also screwing up the steering or “yaw” angle under steering control. Still follow me? Now, bikes are different than airplanes because there is no “angle of attack” control axis in the horizontal aspect. But the fore/aft orientation of the load does influence the “yaw” axis or left/right steering substantially. If the airplane analogy doesn’t work for you try picturing a school bus full of elephants. A road bike with the seat shoved forward is like all the elephants walking forward in the school bus. You can imagine how that would effect steering and braking. With a Cervelo that has its seat oriented forward in the variable geometry seatpost the elephants are still in the right place in the vehicle and the bike handles predictably and rides comfortably.
The "wiggle' chainstays are subtle but have major benefits.
Put the saddle forward on a Cervelo and it works be the frame is designed to be ridden like that. Other bikes are not. I call that perfect bike “fung shui”. It is elegant genius.
The low head tube height is an example of Vroomen and White making the market come to them, rather than pandering to the market. This has created problems though. Vroomen and White gave bike shops and customers more credit than they deserve. A walk thought any transition area will reveal at lest a few Cervelos with an absurd number of spacers between the top of the headset and the bottom of the stem. This is a misguided attempt on the part of the bike shop or the customer to raise the handlebars. It is OK to use a couple centimeters of spacers, but the handlebars on these bikes belong low, that is what they are for. You are supposed to learn to ride like this. It takes time, but it is worth the effort, and it doesn’t happen overnight. Most other bikes won’t allow you to ride this low in the front end. For my taste the Dual is delivered with too many spacers under the stem. You can see this is the photo at the top of this review. What is the point of having a low head tube if you are just going to stack a bunch of spacers under the stem to raise the bars? The point is, it is a start point: As you become more skilled at riding lower you remove the spacers. Eventually and with training you will only have one 5 mm spacer and your fork steer tube can be cut down. You will have a more aero posture than you could achieve on any other bike. you will be a lot faster. You can achieve this posture, but it is like anything else in our sport, it will take a little work.
We put our investigative journalist hats back on and grabbed the tape measure again to prove why Cervelo is better and more aerodynamic. We went back to our sample set of popular tri bikes here in our store: 2004 Guru Trilite, Cannondale Ironman 800, Quintana Roo Kilo and Felt S32. We measure the head tubes in the equivalent seat tube lengths.
I’ll be darn, Cervelo wins again. They have the shortest head tube by over 3 cm.! That is incredible. The benefit to this is an incredible aerodynamic advantage for the rider. In fact, realistically speaking, this is the most significant aerodynamic feature on the bike, not the sexy bladed down tube. A rider can get more aero more easily on a Cervelo Dual, P2K, or P3 because of their lower head tube height than any other bike in its size range. No one even comes close. I find it incredible that there is such an enormous difference. Think about it: Each of these four bikes had roughly equivalent effective seat tube lengths, but the head tubes varied by a range of only 9 cm. for the Cervelo Dual to over 14 cm. high in the highest one we measured. Amazing. This is why your best bike shopping comparison tool is a tape measure.
A super-low head tube facilitates fit other bikes can't approach. Cervelo's internal cable routing is the best in the industry.
Simply put, Cervelo’s aerodynamic triathlon and time trial geometry is the best, most thoroughly conceived, in the bike industry.
This is not a matter of opinion. It is a matter of fact. Shop for a bike with a tape measure and you will see. The numbers don't lie. A tape measure doesn't have opinions.
As you go nuts to bolts on the Cervelo Dual you find the Cervelo product managers did a great job specing out the bike too.
The wheels are the Ritchey Pro DS wheelset. 700 and 650c depending on your frame size. Depending on when the bike was assembled may influence exactly which wheel configuration is on the bike. We find minor variations in wheels from bike to bike within the same 2004 model year, even in the same size. No big deal. When we spoke to Ritchey designs about the pro DS wheelset they told us “Cervelo virtually designed the Pro DS wheelset for us”. There was no wheelset like it in the Ritchey line-up four years ago when Cervelo first came to them saying “Make us a value oriented race and training wheel to spec on our bikes”.
The collaboration resulted in the Ritchey DS Pro. It is a very solid, very fast and reasonably light wheelset suitable for all weights up to around 210 pounds in our estimate, and that is pretty conservative. Rear wheel spoke count is 20 spokes for the 650c bike sizes and 24 spokes for the 700c. In this age with advanced rims and hubs that is plenty of spokes for a strong wheel but not too many to ruin the aerodynamics.

Ritchey Pro DS wheels and Vittoria Rubino Intrepid tires.
The derailleur set on the Dual is excellent: Shimano Ultegra 6500 nine speed. Little else needs to be said. It is light, strong and dependable. The rear derailleur uses sealed ceramic pulley bushings, sealed bracket pivots, aluminum inner and outer links and weighs 215 grams. One very pleasant detail Cervelo included in the parts spec of this bike, and it is something you probably would have never noticed in the bike shop, is a genuine Shimano zinc-alloy plated chain. Thank you Cervelo. They did not low-ball us with a cheap substitute non-Shimano brand chain. They could have too, and you probably would have never noticed since the bike shop would be forced to change to a Shimano chain after you came back saying "The drivetrain makes noise". We have had to give away a lot of free Shimano chains to replace non-Shimano brand chains on other brands of bikes that found they could save a buck by specing a non-Shimano bargain basement chain. But Cervelo traditionally keeps their parts spec pretty “pure” where it counts and is not afraid of upgrading in certain places either. Thank you Cervelo for giving us a real, high quality Shimano brand chain instead of a cheap substitute.

Shimano Ultegra: You already know how well it works.
Shifters are Shimano Dura-Ace nine speed bar-end, the same ones Lance Armstrong used in the Tour de France when he raced on nine speed. They work perfectly.

The nice Profile carbon fiber aerobars provide nearly infinite adjustability.
Cranks have been upgraded to the excellent and attractive FSA Gossamer crank on an impressive, huge diameter ISIS splined bottom bracket. I like this much better than Shimano. The chainrings are a lot nicer, the bottom bracket beefier and the profile of the crank arms themselves is slimmer than Ultegra so you are less likely to hit your ankle bone on them during pedaling. While it is a minor issue I like the appearance of the black crank also. the CErvelo sponsored Team CSC under the leadership of Tyler Hamilton used the FSA cranks in the 2003 Tour de France. I have used FSA cranks extensively and feel they are among the best in the industry now. I din;t at first, but the proof is in using them, and I have used them for over a year. With the exception of Shimano 2004 Dura-Ace, FSA cranks on an ISIS bottom bracket are better than Shimano Ultegra and Shimano 105.

Improved chainrings, bottom bracket and cranks with the FSA Gossamer.
Brake levers are the tried and true Dia-Compe 188, again, as used formerly by Armstrong and about everyone else. Cervelo paid attention to detail and speced black ones.
Even the tires are nice: The impressive new Vittoria Rubino Intrepid with Kevlar and the “3D Compound” tread formula. I love these. They ride great, hold pressure well and are very, very flat resistant. It is about everything you could ask for in a tire.
Handlebars are very good but not my absolute favorite. I am a self-confessed Syntace lover. The Dual uses Profile Carbon Strike aerobars and I know why: Greater adjustability. For most retailers the Profile Carbon Strike is a better choice than Syntace C-2s or streamliners because most retailers are lazy. The Syntace aerobar is more “solid” than Profile but is sold in sizes and is not adjustable for length. I like that. But it means you have to do some swapping of aerobar sizes to fit a customer correctly and we even cut the bars to get the sizing precise for individual customers. Most retailers don’t do that. They prefer the convenience of simply turning a few bolts to get the aerobar size they want, if they bother to adjust it for the customer at all. So, of the profile aerobars, the Carbon Strike is among my favorite, but I still prefer Syntace, although I fully understand and respect Cervelo’s decision to spec these aerobars. It makes better sense for most retailers and customers. In praise of the Profile Carbon strike you can adjust the rotational angle of the grip too, you can't on Syntace. Basically, you can put these bars wherever you want. That is nice.

Shimano Dura-Ace shifters at the ends of the Profile Carbon Strike aerobars.
The base bars are a fine flat-rise bar and the stem is a nice alloy model easily disassembled for flight case use. It is without flaw but non-remarkable. I see no need for change or upgrade except to facilitate fit if necessary.
The saddle: Well- saddles are a matter of personal preference so it doesn’t matter much anyway. We call the Selle Italia saddle on the Dual a “50/50 saddle”. That is to say, 50% of the people who try it for a couple months like it, 50% don’t. I’m in the 50% that didn’t. This isn’t an issue since any retailer worth your while will give you fair value in trade for this saddle toward an upgrade to something like a Fizik Arione (which I love) or a Selle San Marco Azoto Triathlon Gel. Give the saddle on the Dual a fair shake, you may be in the 50% that likes it. A neoprene saddle pad helps it, but I didn't like the curved profile and "lump" in the nose. I’ve been training for Ironman New Zealand so I am perpetually saddle sore. The only thing working for me right now is the Fizik Arione. I love that saddle. Shell out the extra $100 for the upgrade to a Fizik Arione and I bet you'll thank me.
The fork is the Cervelo branded carbon fiber aerodynamic bladed model we've seen before on Cervelo and other triathlon bikes. It is nice and works fine.

Tried and true carbon fiber bladed aerodynamic fork.
Overall, the ride quality of the Dual is, well, pretty damn amazing. I love it. I really enjoy riding this frame. It is an utter delight: light fast and comfortable. Solid and beefy as hell. You can be aggressive but remain comfortable on this frame no matter where the saddle is positioned on the seatpost head. It is brilliant. I am tempted to strip the bike down and build it with a Shimano Dura-Ace 10 speed or Campagnolo Record parts kit to produce a super high-end exotic bike. That would turn the $1599.99 Dual into a $3500+ Ferrari of a bike.The frame is worth such an upgrade. It is simply excellent.
The cornerstone of the frame’s superiority is the Cervelo geometry. No other manufacturer has anything even remotely close. No one. That makes the Dual an amazing bargain at $1599.99 with this parts kit. You could make an effective argument for Cervelo selling this bike at $1999.99 and just saying "Well, this bike is a little more because of the proprietary Cervelo geometry, the only triathlon geometry that works this well.” And you would be right.
The Dual is the best buy in this price category if it fits you. And with this unique geometry, chances are it probably will.
It makes me wonder: When are the other companies going to learn?

martes, 16 de abril de 2013

Le vin et le désir sexuel féminin


désir sexuel fémininUn mythe qui a cessé d'être.

On a beaucoup entendu parler du lien entre la consommation de vin et le désir sexuel féminin. On peut désormais affirmer avec certitude que la consommation modérée de vin rouge augmente remarquablement le désir sexuel féminin, bien qu'il est certain que la consommation de vin tout comme la consommation d'autres liqueurs augmentent le flux sanguin chez l’être humain.
Cependant, les propriétés du vin en font une des boissons alcoolisées les plus aphrodisiaques.
Une récente étude réalisée par l’Université de Florence en Italie met en évidence un test réalisé sur 798 femmes, de 18 à 50 ans (italiennes de la région de Chanti en Toscane). Ces femmes furent réparties en 3 groupes :
  • celles qui ne buvaient pas une goutte de vin
  • celles qui buvaient au moins un verre par jour
  • celles qui buvaient entre un et deux verres par jour
Les résultats montrent que les femmes du troisième groupe c'est-à-dire celles qui buvaient entre un et deux verres de vin par jour, ont des réponses plus positives en termes de désir sexuel que dans les deux autres groupes. Malgré le fait que les femmes plus âgées montrent souvent une plus faible libido, parmi elles le vin a aidé à augmenter le désir sexuel. Ces études ont été publiées dans la prestigieuse revue Journal of Sexuel Medicine (Revue de Médecine Sexuelle).
Afin d’obtenir ces surprenants résultats, les 798 femmes ont dû répondre à un questionnaire de 19 questions d’ordre, bien évidemment, sexuelles, désirs etc.
Comme nous l’avons déjà mentionné, l’alcool augmente le flux sanguin, mais le vin a la particularité de l’accentuer chez les zones clés de la femme, d’où son pouvoir aphrodisiaque. Ces résultats ont surpris tout le monde, et malgré que l’échantillon soit petit, il est évident que le vin a d’autres effets et nous les connaissons déjà.
Un autre détail important est le vin utilisé pour cette étude, du vin rouge. Nous supposons qu’étant le vin le plus concentré, il a plus d’effets mais nous ne pouvons pas affirmer que les autres vins n’aient pas ces propriétés

Les 10 légendes du vin


légendes du vinLes mythes et légendes nous trompent souvent. Jusqu’en 1976, les œnophiles pensaient que la France était l’unique pays capable de produire du vinhaut de gamme. Même si aujourd’hui certaines légendes peuvent faire sourire, d’autres sont encore profondément ancrés dans nos esprits. Nous allons essayer d’y voir plus clair.
10. Le fruit utilisé pour décrire un vin, n’est pas le fruit qui a été utilisé pour l’élaboration
A moins que vous ne soyez en train d’acheter un vin élaboré avec des fruits autres que le raisin, le vin est fait à base de raisins blancs ou rouges et non à base de fruits mentionnés dans la description (par exemple, cerise noire, fraise, kiwi). On peut comparer cela aux saveurs artificielles, c’est-à-dire que le goût est similaire au produit copié sans contenir l’ingrédient en question. Ainsi, en lisant  “touche de framboise, cerise et vanille”, le producteur décrit simplement quel gout a son vin à l’aide de saveurs similaires mais qui ne furent pas utilisés dans l’élaboration de ce vin.
9. On doit avoir un verre de vin différent pour chaque type de vin
Là encore, c’est une légende qui fut discrédité il y a peu de temps. On a besoin d’un verre de vin en forme tulipe ou d’un coupe avec extracteurs sur la partie supérieure pour concentrer le parfum au nez etc. Par exemple, les différentes manières de déguster un vin comme la position de la langue en bouche pour aérer le vin ne sont pas nécessaires. Equipez-vous de bons verres à vin tels que Riedel Ouverture Vin rouge, ou les verres sans pieds de Zinfandel et garder de l'espace dans vos armoires !
8. Tu ne peux pas faire vieillir le vin avec certains bouchons
Des études montrent que les bouchons vissés, ou twist-off comme on les appelle parfois, sont plus consistants que ceux en liège. Une étude, parue la revue Wine Spectator du 31 mars 2005, pages 59-60, a conclu que les bouchons vissés laissent passer 0,001 centimètres cubes d’oxygène par jour dans la surface embouteillée, au lieu des 0,1 à 0,001 centimètres cubes d'air habituels. En effet, 7 bouteilles sur 35 bouteilles scellées avec liège ont permis de faire passer 0,1 cc! Cela signifie que les twist-off sont plus résistants et laissent entrer moins d'oxygène avec le temps d’où un meilleur vieillissement des bouteilles. Selon les producteurs de bouchons en liège, les gens pensent le contraire. Dans tous les cas, en achetant une bouteille avec tel ou tel bouchon, nous n’aurons aucun problème à la faire vieillir.  
7. BordeauxBourgogneChampagne, Xérès et Porto sont des cépages
A cause d’un système d'étiquetage confus en Europe, on confond souvent origine et cépages. Des villes deFrance, d'Espagne, d'Italie et du Portugal limitent la production de différents cépages à leur zone. Pour qu'une cave reçoive l'approbation légale et l'étiquette de son vin, elle doit remplir les conditions de l’organisme en charge de cette zone. Ainsi, un « champagne » n'est pas une variété de vin, mais le lieu où est produit ce vin mousseux. Vous voulez faire du vin non mousseux dans la région de Champagne et inscrire sur l’étiquette Cabernet Sauvignon ? Vous ne pourrez pas. C’est la même chose avec le Bordeaux, qui est un mélange de différents cépages de vins rouges, le Bourgogne, qui est principalement élaboré à partir de Pinot Noir et de Porto et qui s’élabore à partir de cépages de vins rouge et blanc.
6. Marier le vin blanc avec du poisson ou du poulet et le vin rouge avec une viande rouge
La question "quel vin dois-je servir avec ce plat ?" est très souvent utilisée mais incorrecte.  La meilleure manière de marier un aliment avec un vin est d’analyser les goûts de la nourriture et les goûts du vin. Par exemple, si vous aller faire du poisson de saison avec un peu de sel, citron et beurre, choisir un Sauvignon Blanc avec notes d'agrumes, ou un Chardonnay avec un goût de beurre serait du travail de professionnel. Cependant, si le saumon sera couvert d'une sauce de ronce, il serait plus adéquat d’opter pour un vin rouge fruité comme Pinot Noir, Merlot, ou même un Syrah. Le meilleur que vous puissiez faire est lire la description de l'étiquette du vin pour avoir une idée. D’autre part, il est important de savoir que les vins forts se marient mieux avec les plats salés, ou que les vins acides ont besoin d’un plat lui aussi un peu acide, ou que les plats relevés fonctionnent bien avec un vin qui contient un peu sucre résiduel  et non pas avec un degrés élevé d’alcool.
5. Les amateurs du vin sont snobs
Seules les personnes vivant dans le Bordeaux ou Napa sont... Non, je plaisante. En réalité, les amateurs de vins sont studieux et ont les pieds sur terre. Il y a beaucoup de gens qui masquent l’ignorance avec élégance. Les vrais amateurs de vin continuent passionnément leur éducation vinicole, et sont disposés à partager leurs connaissances et une coupe avec n'importe quelle personne intéressée.
4. Tu peux discerner la qualité du vin en regardant les "larmes" qu'il laisse dans le verre
Vous remuez votre verre, le laissez reposer et observez qu'une fine couche transparente s'est déposée à l'intérieur du cristal, et elle commence à s’égoutter vers le bas. Parfois connu comme les larmes, il s'agit simplement d'une petite quantité d'alcool et d'eau qui se rallie à la surface du verre. Ainsi l'alcool s'évapore et l'eau s’égoutte à l’intérieur du verre: pourquoi ? L'eau est un composant principal du vin et l'alcool s'évapore beaucoup plus vite, ainsi, quand vous laissez votre verre, l'alcool s'évapore et la tension superficielle de l'eau augmente en provoquant la formation de gouttes de l'eau desquelles la gravité prend le contrôle. Ce n'est pas une mesure de la viscosité ou la qualité du vin, ne vous en faites pas.
3. Boire le vin rouge à une température ambiante, et les vins blancs frais
Bien que cette idée ne soit pas nécessairement fausse, elle est souvent mal interprétée. Beaucoup de gens pensent qu’il faut laisser reposer le vin rouge  pour qu'il soit à température ambiante, et que le vin blanc doit être servi en sortant du réfrigérateur. La réalité est que le vin rouge laissé dans une pièce normale peut facilement atteindre les 60 degrés Fahrenheit. Beaucoup de professionnels sont d'accord, la meilleure manière de déguster du vin, si vous ne pouvez pas vous offrir un dispositif de stockage à température contrôlée, est de mettre votre vin rouge au frigo pendant environ 5 à 15 minutes avant de le servir et les vins blancs environ 20 - 30 minutes. Encore une fois, ce n'est pas une science exacte, mais ce qui est sûr est que les nuances ne sont pas observées dans un vin blanc servi trop froid par exemple. 
2. Tous les vins s’améliorent avec l'âge
En réalité, très peu de vins ont la structure appropriée pour supporter le vieillissement. La majorité des vins sont faits par être servi jeunes. "L’élite des vins" qui ont remporté des prix et les félicitations de la presse professionnelle sont ceux qui s’améliorent avec les années et la majorité des gens, ne peuvent pas les acheter. Par conséquent si vous gardez depuis 10 ans une bouteille de Zinfandel, pensant qu’elle deviendra meilleure, il est peut-être temps de la boire ;)
1. Sentir le bouchon dans un restaurant estime si le vin est mauvais
Le bouchon sent ... le bouchon, et il ne te donnera pas d'indication sur la qualité du vin. C'est le vin qui doit être examiné par votre odorat, le bouchon se résume à un examen rapide. Que devez-vous regarder quand le sommelier vous montre le bouchon ? Si vous achetez une bouteille chère, la chose la plus importante à éviter est la contrefaçon, et si vous êtes es dans un restaurant de renom, il est peu probable de vous faire arnaquer. Juste quelques précautions : sur l’étiquette lit-on le nom de la cave, son logo ou bien des informations sur d’autres marques ? Le liège est-il abîmé, a-t-il permis la filtration d'une manière ou d’une autre? Si c'est une bouteille plus chère, l'année estampée dans le liège coïncide-t-elle avec la récolte du vin ?