New Bike Vs. New Wheels

The S32 already has Tri bike geometry. At most the frame contributes 5% to your total drag. Since both frames have aero features the diffences are probably miniscule. It is likely you would not see any speed gains with the P2C. However, most people will argue that the wheels are almost guaranteed to save time.

Yes, the cervelo is sexier, otherwise you wouldn't even be asking this so you have to decide whether you are going for time or status.

With new wheels, keep in mind the wrong tire selection or pressure can negate the aero advantage. Also keep in mind that the drag qualities of wheels are typically tested (if at all) without a bike, so the aero characteristics of a particular wheel can change depending on the bike. Aero bonuses are not straight line cumulative.

What year is your S32? Big changes were made from the 07 to the 08.

I have an 06 S22 (old frame style) and recently put on a set of American Classic 38mm carbon tubular race wheels that I bought used for $450 (with ~250 miles on them).  So far I used them on a 58 mile ride with lots of steep hills, one 25mi training ride and an Oly race.  The difference in weight is a amazing, I can tell right away when I switch the wheel sets back and forth.  And the ride quality in my opinion is much improved with the carbon wheels on rough pavement.  Used wheel sets can be found all the time and the $ saved can go towards getting other used parts to upgrade anything you want on the S32 (e.g aerobars).

Then again if I could I'd go out and buy a B12 or a B2 right now!

Frame design, not material property .........

The P2C is not as "aggressive" as say the P3 or the DA/B2, but it can still be set up to provide a good aero position.  Then again, so can your Felt if it is sized right!

Get the wheels, upgrade the bike later.

Seems every one wants nice wheels.

Improve your engine by training smart and you'll make more gains. Cassettes are easy to change and get as they can be race course dependant. I have 4 different cassettes I use on various courses.

My suggestion is don't get anything now. Work on getting faster and see in time what makes most sense. IM is wicked expensive and you might have more expenses than you think.

It seems you have a good bike and are considering a slightly better bike, why? Wheels are cool but not that big a difference for average AGer.

I do have race wheels bought on ebay but it is one big tri purchase that seems silly...5 minutes in IM? For $1K or $2K seems ridiculous. Sure they look cool.

+1

I totally agree. Work on the engine. It’s not the arrow. It’s the Indian… If you really feel you need to get something I would recommend a wheel cover for $95. It’s probably the best bang for the buck. However, as with any “aero” race wheel it requires that you keep a decent pace to reap the benefit. Again, if you don’t have the legs then you know what to do…

In peace,

CQ

Not true at all, in fact it's been noted here time and again that slower riders reap more benefit simply by the fact that they're out there longer.

Also need to comment on the "work on the engine" statement, which often appears in these equipment threads. To me it's a red herring. Do you guys really think someone is going to stop training, stop "working on the engine," because, in this case, they bought a new set of wheels? I really look at these "Which do you recommend?" questions as based on any given engine.

A Ferrari engine in a Mack truck it's not going to perform up to it's potential.

The #1 reason for most people...

Mark

There is nothing to disagree about.  It is completely true.  Aerodynamics don't start working at a magic number, they work from 0.1 mph and up.

AND ....... the benefit in actual time saved by using aero goodies for a slower rider is MORE than what a faster rider would gain.

Rough example.  If a wheelset gains you 2% decrease in time for an IM ride, the 5 hour rider will shave 6 minutes.  The 6 hour rider will shave 7.2 minutes.  Granted, it is not quite that simple, but the basic gist of it is .........

Aero benefits everyone, plain and simple.  It just becomes a little bit more critical for those going hyperspeed to have a really good position and goodies or they use a lot more energy to keep up with someone else with a better position going the same speed.  Flaws in position/equipment are amplified by velocity.

Well, if this were my choice, I'd go for the wheels and a powermeter.  I got a new bike last winter as well, and it took me a long time to finally feel at home on it, so there's no way I'm changing.  I think as long as there aren't any glaring comfort/fit issues, you should stick with your bike.  FWIW, I'm also in for IMWI.  My wheel of choice would be the HED3 if cost were not an option, but more realstically, the HED Jet series (clinchers). 

I'm a superlight rider on 650c wheels and no desire to deal with tubular, so my needs are probably different than yours.  But hey, there's my opinion anyway.

This might be true on an absolutely flat course but if we use your IM example you need to haul that heavy 1080/disc combo up many hills. I have a very hard time believing you will see an overall 2% time reduction averaging 15-17 mph for IMoo, IMC or IMLP. I guess I need to drink some more of that Zipp/Hed cool-aid.

No.  You need to go do the math.  Remember that for every hill you go up, you have to go down and aerodynamics make a big difference there.  None of those courses are so hilly that aerodynamics still doesn't clearly trump weight.  Slower riders will save more time (though lower percentage) than faster riders.  Enjoy the kool-aid.

And while you're skipping that kool-aid, go look at the average weights of a tubular 1080 set versus a set of clincher road wheels.  Huh, go figure ........ the Zipps are lighter .........

I rode my road bike at Lake Placid, which at the time was a 15.1lb complete bike with Ksyrium SL clinchers on it.  Guess what, I rode it with my Zipp 999's (disc rear, 808 front).  Race day weight of the bike???  14.9 .......... Yup, my disc wheelset weighed LESS than my clinchers.

So I got lighter weight AND aerodynamics!!

Woohoo!!!  Free speed and a better climbing bike!!

Do your research a little better instead of relying on conjecture and assumptions please.

My "research" is done on the bike and not on the zipp web site. I can honestly tell you that I am not noticeably faster on my 404's (clinchers w/cover) compared to my box rim training wheels (approximately the same weight). I ride approximately the same splits in training as I do on race day. I am a little faster, not much, on raceday mainly due to a good taper and some extra adrenaline. Definite buyers remorse on the 404's. Oh well what do I know...

Btw, I am not the one zipping the kool-aid. I did but stoped.

And neither is mine.

It is plain old physics and aerodynamics.  Lighter + aero = faster all around.  But aero trumps weight even on the hilliest of courses.  Why do you think that the pro cyclists are all riding deep section wheels now even in the Alps in a Tour stage?  If they were simply looking for "light" they'd all be riding Reynolds KOM's or Zipp 202's.

I'm significantly faster on race day then in training ....... we're talking usually top 1 - 5% of the field on the bike.  I buy the goodies because I'm looking for every little advantage I can get since my training time is minimalized by life.  But there is no reason at all for someone to not spend the dough on a set of aero wheels when as long as they can afford it, it is free speed, regardless of how fast they are.

Are there more cost effective ways to gain speed?  Sure ....... aero helmet, perfect fitting, clothing, mathcing tire widths to optimize existing rims, etc.  But in the choice between "wheels or bike" when they already have a tri bike, it makes a lot more sense to get the wheels.

And of course, it goes without saying that training more always works.