# ICE 2010 lineup



## 45cotterless (30 Aug 2009)

Here it is ! Time to get the jollies out of the piggy bank!

http://rbr.info/community/blog/14-travis/508-news-from-ice-on-the-2010-trice-lineup.html


----------



## dataretriever (30 Aug 2009)

Mmmmmmmmmmmmmm, I like the front suspension, especially as it's retrofittable. The savings might have to take a battering.......


----------



## byegad (31 Aug 2009)

I don't see the need for full suspension on a tadpole if you are riding on the road. While the rear suspension on my QNT certainly works and takes the sting out of the odd pothole, I also ride an unsuspended Kettwiesel and on the same roads the difference is minimal. 

Now if you are riding fast and off road that's a different story but I suspect that we are seeing a move to full suspension in the trike world for fashion rather than functional reasons.


----------



## squeaker (31 Aug 2009)

byegad said:


> I don't see the need for full suspension on a tadpole if you are riding on the road.


IIRC, the majority of velomobile manufacturers seem to disagree? I recall ICE saying that they've found that their (short travel) suspension improves the roadholding on rough roads (presumably by keeping the wheels on the ground more often), and is good for taking the edges off things like expansion joints, both of which sound useful attributes to me. On the downside I recall watching one of the Borealis' at the HPV Worlds pogoing under full grunt.... Guess we will have to wait and see what the trade-offs (and cost) are, but on balance, it will be nice to have the choice.


byegad said:


> but I suspect that we are seeing a move to full suspension in the trike world for fashion rather than functional reasons.


You old cynic: cycling as a fashion statement - oh, hang on...


----------



## byegad (31 Aug 2009)

If we are talking about Velomobiles we have a number of extra factors.
1. A Velomobile is heavier, roughly double the vehicle weight of a Trice.
2. It is also likely to be travelling faster than an unfaired trike for long periods. I spoke to a person who tested the Borealis in 2008 and he mentioned how much faster he was cruising on a flat road than he would be on his Trice S. Over 50% faster, and at times twice as fast, as he was used to on the S.
3. Body chatter. The same rider mentioned how the unsprung Borealis he rode was drumming and he could see the body moving around even on smooth roads. 

These factors make a full suspension system desirable for a Velomobile.

On my normal rides I average 11 mph or so and I only ever exceed 20mph downhill. (I also often exceed 30mph and occasionally exceed 40mph but only for very short distances.) At these speeds I don't really see the need for full sus'. Even if a rider is a lot faster than me on an unfaired trike I doubt (s)he would be spending much time at over 20mph. In my experience faster trikers climb a LOT faster than me but on the flat cruise only a little faster than I do and descend at the same speed as me.

I agree that choice is nice to have but aren't we moving to the trike equivalent of 4x4 use with this fashion?


----------



## 45cotterless (31 Aug 2009)

Yep, agreed, there's also the question of cost. I heard £400 for the suspension kit.It's cheaper to get a full set of Big Apples. 
The good thing is that ICE are innovators and it's good they're thinking forwards.
I can't wait for the Olympic Model ( Lord Coe; whipped or branded?)


----------



## byegad (31 Aug 2009)

Yes I heard £400 too. Big apples are less than £20 apiece if you shop around. 

The 'Entry level' model is interesting, no suspension and presumably lighter and cheaper? I would consider this as my number three trike.


----------



## davidaw (31 Aug 2009)

Disagree.

I often ride the flats over 20mph, and sometimes over 25mph. My best average is 18mph over 40 miles, and usually well over 15mph. This on a Trice Q with fairing.

I would like to get rid of the all too often bone shakes that suspension can deal with. Would also help with nuts etc remaining tight longer.

There again, if I rode on nice road surfaces all the time, I wouldn't think about suspension, no matter the speed.


----------



## byegad (31 Aug 2009)

OK so where is the magic speed, below which you don't need suspension and above wich you do. I'll start average speed of 11 or 12 average mph is too slow to need full sus'.

P.S. 
I live in County Durham so spend fair amount of any ride going up hill. I find my average speed goes up a couple of miles an hour in flatter parts of the country.


----------



## davidaw (31 Aug 2009)

byegad said:


> OK so where is the magic speed, below which you don't need suspension and above wich you do. I'll start average speed of 11 or 12 average mph is too slow to need full sus'.
> 
> P.S.
> I live in County Durham so spend fair amount of any ride going up hill. I find my average speed goes up a couple of miles an hour in flatter parts of the country.



Speed was part of your argument, not mine!

Personally though, I find I slow down a lot when on bad road surfaces. Perhaps I wouldn't so much with full suspension.


----------



## byegad (31 Aug 2009)

Try Big Apples they roll well and give a really smooth ride.


----------



## davidaw (31 Aug 2009)

byegad said:


> Try Big Apples they roll well and give a really smooth ride.



No thanks. Would rather have suspension.


----------



## byegad (31 Aug 2009)

Different strokes for different folks. At an estimated £400 for the ICE front set I'll stick to Big Apples.


----------



## davidaw (31 Aug 2009)

If that is what works for you, great. I want more though, and better.


----------



## CopperBrompton (31 Aug 2009)

I've ridden a Q with Big Apples, and while it's marginally more comfortable on a rough road, the difference really is very small. 

When I compare the feel of bumps on the front wheels with the rear wheel, it's night and day. I'm no speed merchant on the flat, but have been forced to slow down by a rough road. Downhill, I like to go flat out, so there I think the suspension will make a huge difference.

I'm hoping it'll be less than £400 (the figure I heard was £250), but I think it's very likely I'll upgrade.


----------



## byegad (1 Sep 2009)

Well I was given the £400 by someone who should know but as you say Ben it would be a lot more affordable at £250. 

ICE seem to be well aware of marketing issues, hence the entry level model?? We will soon know the price and be getting some feedback from users.


----------



## 45cotterless (1 Sep 2009)

I'll go with that. The most noticable feature of suspension is cutting down on fatigue. Every time you shake and rattle muscles are in work. This may not add up on a short run but over 100k you'll be glad that the suspension either tyre or frame has taken the strain and the pain. 
I'll probably won't be ordering until the price is announced, which is nice!


----------



## byegad (1 Sep 2009)

45cotterless said:


> I'll go with that. The most noticable feature of suspension is cutting down on fatigue. Every time you shake and rattle muscles are in work. This may not add up on a short run but over 100k you'll be glad that the suspension either tyre or frame has taken the strain and the pain.
> I'll probably won't be ordering until the price is announced, which is nice!



Even better to have if you get lost and cover 100 miles rather than 100km!



Oops did I type that?


Sorry Nick!


----------



## 45cotterless (1 Sep 2009)

I made it 122 miles, NEVER AUDAX on a QNT !!!


----------



## dataretriever (1 Sep 2009)

Why not? Chonker and I managed it without any problems! It must be you.......


----------



## 45cotterless (1 Sep 2009)

Yep, by some error of stupidity I signed up for a pleasant 60miles through the Cotswolds (not a flat area of the realm).
On noting that I was too late to get signed in at any of the staging posts, I saw that I had signed up for the 100 mile tour.
Given that no one in our tribe has any sense ( of direction ) and armed only with a set of instructions and no map I eventually arrived back at Meriden.
There was 122 miles on the clock, I met some thoroughly nice people who not only gave me advice but food and drink. Especially the kind lady who came to look at my bear mascot with the "Xmas my A.se" badge on!
I'd love to do another 60 miler, in company. I hear Byegad is similarly keen!!


----------



## dataretriever (1 Sep 2009)

well i'm up for one, i really enjoyed the London sightseer 100km through london and we didn't get lost once, despite 5 x A4 pages of instructions


----------



## 3tyretrackterry (1 Sep 2009)

I'm in for a 60 miler if you want more company and would like to put faces to names if that makes sense


----------



## 45cotterless (1 Sep 2009)

I'm the guy in the avatar behind the wheel !!!


----------



## byegad (1 Sep 2009)

dataretriever said:


> Why not? Chonker and I managed it without any problems! It must be you.......




Glad I didn't say that!


----------



## byegad (1 Sep 2009)

45cotterless said:


> Yep, by some error of stupidity I signed up for a pleasant 60miles through the Cotswolds (not a flat area of the realm).
> On noting that I was too late to get signed in at any of the staging posts, I saw that I had signed up for the 100 mile tour.
> Given that no one in our tribe has any sense ( of direction ) and armed only with a set of instructions and no map I eventually arrived back at Meriden.
> There was 122 miles on the clock, I met some thoroughly nice people who not only gave me advice but food and drink. Especially the kind lady who came to look at my bear mascot with the "Xmas my A.se" badge on!
> I'd love to do another 60 miler, in company. I hear Byegad is similarly keen!!



Hah! Do they do multi day 60 milers???

I can do 60 miles in one day but don't choose the winter solstice if you want me to finish in the light of the same day!

We did a somewhat hilly run of 36 miles at Bike Right and you fell asleep fully clothed when you got in, some hour and three quarters, or was it two hours, before me.


----------



## byegad (1 Sep 2009)

45cotterless said:


> I'm the guy in the avatar behind the wheel !!!



No way! The avatar is too flattering!


----------



## Auntie Helen (9 Sep 2009)

Back to the Big Apples, I've just removed the one from my rear wheel as it's incompatible with the new QR mudguard. I also found I had to remove them from the front wheels as they were forever fouling the front mudguards and I had to continually adjust the things. It's Marathons all round now.

Like others here, I think the suspension sounds a good idea but I'm not going to spend £400 on it, or even £250. I have a lot of squeaks from the elastomer on my rear suspension which causes a fair bit of annoyance and has to be continually silicone greased, so I'm not keen on introducing squeak possibilities to the front too!


----------



## Chonker (9 Sep 2009)

Huh whatnow? lets do it


----------



## markg0vbr (9 Sep 2009)

i have big apple on, all round, they are nice and smooth. front suspension i might consider dependent on the price as the roads around here are terrible, on some of my regular rides i have to swerve all over the road to avoid the worst bits. rotherham tin box addicts have a appalling attitude toward trike let alone ones trying to avoid potholes.


----------



## ufkacbln (9 Sep 2009)

45cotterless said:


> (cut)
> I'd love to do another 60 miler, in company. I hear Byegad is similarly keen!!



Come and join us on the Isle of Wight Randonnee next year. Unfortunately I let the side down by riding an upwrong (wheel problem with trike). However there was a solid trike peleton with several members of this parish participating.

Really flat scenic route.


----------



## Wildduck (11 Sep 2009)

Flat on the IOW? Oh course it is! Have started immediately after the last one. Look forward to racing round next year!

Latest price quoted when I visited ICE at the beginning of the week was £500 for the front suspension. Apparently one of the team had just got back from Taiwan where they had been testing the kit.


----------



## CopperBrompton (12 Sep 2009)

Ouch! £500 is a bit steep.

The delightfully flat IoW Randonee route can be seen here for anyone contemplating it:












Ride blog:
http://www.benlovejoy.com/cycle/tripreports/isleofwight/


----------



## 45cotterless (13 Sep 2009)

That's the beastie. Done round the island Randonee three times on a QNT. You need patience for the hills (up!)


----------



## ufkacbln (13 Sep 2009)

Also depend which way... the hills are steeper and sharper on last year's anti-clockwise than nxt years clockwise.

However if you start at Kite Hill the Whippingham section is a nasty little sting in the tail!


----------



## Wildduck (14 Sep 2009)

Considering staying at Kite Hill again next year but starting at Cowes to avoid the slog at the end of the day. Although if I'm that much fitter and faster it shouldn't matter, especially if there's a promise of some Goddards at the end.....


----------



## DPatrick (19 Sep 2009)

*That's what we would call a buzz-killer.*

Can anyone explain the logic in ICE forcing rbr to kill the thread on the new Trice models with front suspension?
On this side of the pond, a manufacturer aims at building public interest in future products. In alii verbi, they want to maximize the buzz in hopes of increasing demand.


----------



## 45cotterless (20 Sep 2009)

In the blurb, it appears that the info was for dealers only. As you said anything else new is open to advance viewing to satiate the appetite.
I had a ride on the new sports model and held the new folding rear end. I was told under no circumstances to publish any pics!!!


----------



## DPatrick (20 Sep 2009)

*Debut at bike show?*

Since ICE allowed you to ride their new sports model, and to hold the new folding mechanism, you must be one truly honest man, and worthy of trust. I salute you, but for those of us whom curiousity compels...
Weren't the new Trice models to be shown at a bike show? Surely there must be published reports from that show. Otherwise, what would be the point?


----------



## byegad (20 Sep 2009)

I was at 45cotterless's secret meeting too. Save your money and just wait until you see the new line up. Truly great engineering and looks to die for.


----------



## DPatrick (23 Sep 2009)

*I'll wait*

Guess I'll have to wait until pictures and specs of the new Trice's are released. Can hardly wait to see the new performance models for 2010, and the equipment it comes with.


----------



## byegad (24 Sep 2009)

DPatrick said:


> Guess I'll have to wait until pictures and specs of the new Trice's are released. Can hardly wait to see the new performance models for 2010, and the equipment it comes with.



Good decision! Now how do I persuade Mrs byegad that I really need another trike?


----------



## DPatrick (25 Sep 2009)

*Trice persuasion*

Hey Byegad,
Show her the photos from the Interbike show in Vegas posted on the blog on RBR. These new Trice's fold into such a small package that they wont take up hardly any room in storage. It is said that a picture is worth ten thousand words, and there are plenty of pictures.
Just ignore the tired advice that what happens in Vegas stays in Vegas. HAH!!!


----------



## byegad (25 Sep 2009)

I believe they were removed at ICE's request. Are they still there now?

My sneak preview was on the strict understanding that I took no pictures, or atleast if I did keep them to myself until after the official launch! 

At the very least I'll be buying the new back end to get the fold!!!!!!


----------



## ufkacbln (26 Sep 2009)

The RBR info is still there and includes:



> We did, however, make it to the ICE booth where we learned all kinds of stuff. The 2010 models do not have a solid release date yet, only "some time in 2010". Don't look for these in the first quarter. But here is what's known. There are three models: the Adventure, the Sprint, and the Vortex. All three trikes feature the new ICE Trice folding mechanism which is a thing of beauty. We were asked not to shoot video of it, and we complied, but believe me when I say that the ease and speed of folding will have you wondering if its time to sell your current trike.
> 
> ICE has simplicity as a goal next year. They are reducing the product line from the mix of Q, QNT, T, TNT, and the varieties of stock colors to three trikes with one color each. This allows for a much clearer marketing message and a reduced headache for dealers who like to stock all the available models.
> 
> The Adventure, in blue, is the basic model. The Sprint is the mid-range model with suspension. The Vortex is the speed machine with a 700c rear wheel. Its black and red detailing is certainly striking.



Interesting - if you are quick the RBR photos are stillthere including this of the Vortex:







This is the same decison that Catrike made with the 700






There is much debate as to whether the use of a 700 wheel is an efective upgrade to the (theoretically) stonger 26" wheel of the Expedition, but that is another discussion


----------



## Wildduck (26 Sep 2009)

The Vortex utilises some some scarily light SRAM XX componentry - I sure the stuff is made from fairy dust! (examined some of this when I was done in the factory a few weeks ago). I sense they're very proud of this model seeing it as a replacement for the Monster of old (which they still have on show in their stairwell).

I'm dreading the price though; SRAM XX is not cheap!


----------



## Wildduck (26 Sep 2009)

...actually now I think more about the visit, I think I remember a converstaion about two levels of components and a figure of £3k - can't remember though whether that's the XX model or the Vortex with the slightly 'lower' grade materials.

Must remember to slow down on my trike and stop blasting those brain cells on those fast downhills......


----------



## byegad (26 Sep 2009)

User3143 said:


> ICE have blantely copied the designs of Catrike. Disc brakes instead of drum, and a 700cc wheel. Think they have finally caught onto the idea that people may want to go fast rather then plod along on a 20'' wheel.
> 
> They have to be careful with the frame design when using a 700cc wheel because of the lateral force imposed.




Discs have been an option for a long time on ICE trikes. With the SA being virtually a fit and forget component I can't see the need for discs. As to speed and big wheels, I think the jury's out on that one, Dr Moulton proved suspended small wheels are at least as quick as big wheels at least on road. Also you still have the majority of the trike weight on 20" wheels even with a big back wheel.


----------



## ufkacbln (26 Sep 2009)

User3143 said:


> ICE have blantely copied the designs of Catrike. Disc brakes instead of drum, and a 700cc wheel. Think they have finally caught onto the idea that people may want to go fast rather then plod along on a 20'' wheel.
> 
> They have to be careful with the frame design when using a 700cc wheel because of the lateral force imposed.




As I intimated ealier there are two similar models on the Catrike range, The Expedition and 700:

Expedition







700






There is a lot of heated discussion on both BentRiderOnline and the Catrike Forum as to whether the extra speed from the 700 is worth the decrease in strength of the wheel. The popular answer is that for the average rider similarly shod Trikes that there is little difference in performance.

Some have actually bought one model and then changed the wheels as they wanted the inclined seat!


I know Trice had a possibility of fitting either wheel on the rear on the 26 series - this may be the answer


----------



## byegad (26 Sep 2009)

With Trice either back end fits the same trike so you can ring the changes, at a price! 

Unsuspended big wheel or suspended small wheel the angle of the rest of the trike stays the same!


----------

