I agree the seatpost without quick adjustment is a potential miss. Would add some cost, but some easier fore-aft adjust seems beneficial.
I wonder if people aiming for a very forward position can get there with the apparent rear offset? I’ve not seen it mention, but maybe the seatpost is reversable to forward offset, like the old Allez Sprint post did.
Based on the info shared by gplama it’s not. Slack angle + 20mm offset won’t suit everyone.
If it can be reversed then it might.
Rotating the seat post isn’t mentioned in the manual, and there are no really close/clear/useful pictures to tell if the shape is the same. It would make sense to do that, but when does something that makes sense make it into a product. I guess, so far, it could work that way, but I would expect that to be in the setup manual if it did. (The include a warning to not install the bars backward after all)
EDIT: Max power 1,800 watts, max simulated incline 16%, and +/-2% accuracy? 
These are the specs of the Core, but a 2T would be more challenging. I’m waiting for a first purchaser that swaps out the Core for a different trainer. A 2T: Max power 2,200 watts, max incline 25%, <1% accuracy…
Who is regularly ripping above those Core numbers? I have a strong sprint for my weight, but can’t break 1200w even with strong BMX training. Rhe few heavy hitters I know can’t hit 1800w and only tip above 1500w for moment. Its hardly a limiter from what I see.
And the 16% is a rather steep limit for most riders. Considering that plenty of people never swap from the 50% Trainer Difficulty setting in Zwift, that puts even the steep stuff like the antennae climb at a mere 8-9%.
The Core is a very popular trainer for good reason and I don’t see the specs holding up many but the far right of the bell curve. And those people can consider the Kickr V6 that is fully compatible at present (once the frame options is sold).
Hah! I used to ride with a bunch of gear heads that were always bragging about their above 1,000 watt intervals. A couple of them bragged about their Watt Bikes, and the 2,500 watt max. I don’t doubt that they might have been trash talking/bragging, but many of them were semi-pro riders doing things I could only do in my dreams.
Still, I thought of a mew model for Zwift! The ‘Ride Plus’ with the Kickr instead of the Core.
I just remember the first time I put difficulty to 100% (11?) and rode my 2T on the hills. WOW!! I mean, even at 50% it’s a really tough workout (we have ZERO hills around here) so riding the 2T was what I considered a real workout. It was challenging. And, yeah, I was surprised that I was a ‘trainer snob’, but having ‘more’ over what I can do is nice. I have pushed 1,200 watts for 5 seconds on Zwift with the appropriate provisos and such. I seriously doubt that I could do that now. (I’m just a stupid old man, literally starting out at zero (again) hoping I can recover some of what I had pre-op)
Yeah, it (Ride) could be better. I was partially being tongue in cheek, and partially being a marketing droid.
There will be people that won’t by this version of the ‘Bike’ because of the Core. There are people that buy titanium screws to save a fraction of a pound too. There are people that have their manhoods tied up in what they ride and how much they think they can putout on the pedals. Just like there are people that swear they can tell the difference between the different mastering/productions levels on a CD, and can tell a tube amp from a transistor one. Sorry I edited the previous post if it triggered people. I just thought they should have made it an option for the Kickr over the Core. Just in case.
I mean, why buy the Kickr if the Core is ‘good enough’.
Kickr V6 > Core off the top of my head ignoring the macho higher power & grade settings:
Different strokes and all that. I’m sure there are people who benefit from the big K ratings, but I’m betting it’s a small percentage vs the number where Core specs are plenty.
Yes, but…
One group ride I was on, a youngling showed up with a steel frame low end ‘bso’, and people were ripping him, but he really did a damn good job keeping up. He showed up for another ride and never was seen again. People kept commenting that if he could do that on a cheap bike, what could be do on a carbon bike. I felt sorry for him, getting that much crap for what he had. So many cyclists can be far too damn cruel. But THEY had the carbon, and Dura Ace, and all the expensive goodies.
There are people that will spend money of literally anything titanium, and worry about how much their new tires weigh, and if their hairy arms are costing them speed.
Yeah, they would likely pass on the Zwift Ride because it’s a ‘Core’.
For me, I wanted an accurate, quiet and durable wheel off trainer, so I grabbed a Tacx Neo 2T, and have suffered the increased demand of that while I had my victimized Madone on it. Now have the Neo Smart bike, and get(got) killed by it.
But if I was looking for a trainer now, I’d go Kickr 80% because it’s just a very much better design that the Core. A solidly better design. (To me)
I liked the 2T because of the solid design (I thought) of the ‘wings’. It just looked sturdy and still ‘portable’.
As the main difference between the two is the legs, the main difference for in the descision for most people is if they have flat floors to put it on, and if they move their trainer setup at all, my 2T has moved , well never, I think if I was looking for a trainer now I would be more than happy with the Core
I think that this thread is presuming that Zwift is trying to make the perfect products, I don’t think they are, I feel that they think for to long that companies have been making a lot of money out of Zwift by making more and more expensive products, but done very little to prompt Zwift as the entry point has been getting higher and higher, so they have been investing and promoting products that appear to address this, the Core/Zwift Hub might not be the best product on the market, but it the best product on the market for most people, it has moved the idea of a top end trainer to a lower price point, the Zwift Ride might not be the best smart bike, but you can get a complete smart bike, clean and tidy, for the same MRP as a Tacx Neo
I don’t think these are intended as perfect products, more to shake the industry up, after all, if Zwift can do it, surely these companies who specialize in the area can do it better, it will be simple for Tacx to produce these products with a belt and a reversible seatpost for the same price, rather than the 3x the price Neo Bike Plus
And it’s simple to see how this helps Zwift, you can see the conversation at the moment (pre zwift ride) can’t you, speak to your partner about wanting a smart bike, and ending getting a Peleton as they can’t see the benefit over the Peleton, which is cheaper, and does more (in there eyes) and looks nicer in the corner of the living room
I feel that this goes to the Zwift Play as well, where the opposite is playing out, it over priced compared to a game controller, almost inviting people to make better / cheaper options (this argument will hold more weight when Zwift release the API, but they could just be establishing the system and make it attractive for other companies to invest in)
Like I said, I don’t feel that these products are intended as Halo products, more to cause market disruption , and we can see this already, not so long as for a recommendation of a trainer and the it would all have been Tacx Neo, it harder to justify it now when the Hub/Core are where they are
This isn’t trying to kill of Halo products, people will always justify buying what they want over what they need, look at the cars people drive, it’s a joke in the cycling industry, whats the most popular endurance bike, dogma with all the spacers, which comes down to people buying what they want rather than what they need
I had a play with it at the weekend. Footprint and styling is nice, biggest concern (apart from the fact it’s locked down to a single platform) is longevity. Compared to a Neo Bike or Kickr Bike, it feels very plasticy, especially around the cranks/BB, that look like they are not replaceable or easily serviceable.
I reckon the bike you might want to have is v2 or a “pro version”, which is slightly more upmarket and remedies all the shortcomings. E. g. for me the lack of 165 mm cranks would be a deal breaker. That and the lack of gearing for other platforms like TR. (I don’t use Zwift.)
The one thing I really like is the two bottle “cages”, which are one more than you get on Kickr Bike (why?!) and they are not proper cages as you don’t need a cage on a stationary bike. Smart. Ditto for the integrated hex key. I hope Wahoo, Tacx and the other usual suspects are taking notes.
A similar product is the bike frame by Caveworks, which will come in a geared and non-geared variant. I very much like the idea of their product, I wonder how much it will cost. The only pity is that their cranks are only available in 3 sizes from 170 mm to 175 mm.
I feel like a fork with legs would actually be a pretty great product. Then you just take any bike and can make it a nice stationary bike. Then have the handlebar/stem adjustable a bit like that cave works frame.
What’s the reason to use a fork mount and not just the front wheel? Not arguing, just wondering why you’d buy something else when you already have the wheel.
Space and neatness, this is in the living room and makes it visually smaller.
I would think that someone could come up with a ‘bike’ like that Caveworks, and have a movable stem that controlled steering in Zwift, for those that use Zwift.
The Ride is reducing the ‘bike’ to its basics, something to hold a user up, and provide rotation from the crank to the attached trainer device. Adding steering (actual steering tied to a movable bar set) would seem to be an easy sell. Maybe the ‘pro model’. There is a lot they could do for the future.
Regarding the ‘plastic look’, it looks like I’d expect a Zwift product to look. Dealing with the crank length is unfortunately going to be an issue for some (many) people. But should they sell different cranks, or different bikes, or license a ‘bear paw’ style crank end. Time will tell…
Having used both, I can see why they have moved away from the concept, to me it felt clumbersome and ungainly, if I had to pay for the Play version of stearing over the Elite Plate version of stearning, I would
** Edit
Mainly because most of steering isn’t turning the handlebars
“Real” steering has been tried numerous times and it has failed each time (Zwift using a phone, the Elite option, etc.) It is just not realistic and comes with a number of tradeoffs…excessive turning radius and toe overlap being the major ones.
At the end of the day, it is in execution more unrealistic than realistic, IME.
I remember the Zwift mtb experiment where everyone just fell off the bridge the first 10 times they rode it 
Having never tried steering (using an iPhone?** Really?) I thought that more realism would be beneficial, ie: moving physical bars like on a real bike. I always wanted to try the sterzo unit, but I guess it’s out now.
But using ‘paddles’ on the end of the shifters to steer? It just doesn’t seem appealing to me. I did buy the Play controller set, and then found out they don’t fit the Neo Smart Bike. sigh So I have them if I swap bikes or use one of my bikes on a trainer.
Tangent: I always wondered why Shimano/SRAM didn’t license/develop a ‘cockpit system’ that they could sell/license to manufacturers. Seems ‘out there’, but I’d LOVE a much more realistic setup than the gen 1 Neo Smart. But then it’s such a niche market, the profit likely wouldn’t be in it at all so I’m sure they would rather sue copycats.
** I did try it once, with an iPhone. DOH… See my next post.
I get it now. But just turning the bars and not a front wheel (would be another place for the system to fail) would be interesting. It would have to turn slower, like IRL.
Yeah, I tried ‘repack ridge’ with my iPhone, and at times it just ignored me. It was like if the bike was being controlled by someone else. I finally got stuck and gave up. Waste of time… That’s what has kept me thinking of ‘a better way’. Since the ‘Ride’ is missing a front wheel, turning the bars on a tube hooked to potentiometer(s) would be more immersive/realistic (I hear that’s the word for Apple’s new Vision Pro: ‘Immersive’. I do like watching movies on them. Not sure ‘immersive’ is what I’d use as an adjective, but they do pull off a 3-D look rather well. I’m a little embarrassed to say I have them to watch movies but still searching for ;the killer app’. (Art Universe is an interesting app, if it didn’t blowup so often))
