Falco V Bike Review

Well it has taken me a little while but I have finally done a review of my Falco V. To be honest I always intended to take a while to do this, I wanted to make sure I gave myself plenty of time to get to know the bike. But now that I have had the bike for a month, and even done a race on it, I think I know it well enough to form an opinion.

Before I get to that opinion though, first some disclosure. I am sponsored by Falco, so I have some vested interest in giving this bike a good review. As well as that, I approached Falco and asked them for sponsorship. I was intrigued by a company that would go to the extremes of design to create a bike with such a single minded focus on speed. Having said all that, I will try to make this review as even and honest as I can, giving both the good and the bad. Hopefully I have succeeded.

So with that said, on to the bike.

Straight away it is obvious that the Falco V is not an ordinary bike, the total lack of seat stays being a bit of a give away. The V is what is commonly known as a beam bike, the name coming from the fact that the saddle is mounted out on a beam. The beam bike idea is not new, having been pioneered in the 90s. As far as I am aware (I could be wrong) Softride were the first brand to really run with the idea. However, their bikes were more about comfort than aerodynamics. Zipp contributed too with the Zipp 2001 and 3001, which by all accounts were very aero bikes. Unfortunately a UCI ruling in the late 90s made these bikes illegal for cycling. Triathlon was not yet the big market it is today, so without the cycling market, the bikes were no longer profitable to make. That was it, the beam bike idea was dead.

But that was then and this is now. Now the triathlon TT market is massive, easily big enough to sustain non UCI-legal bikes, a fact that has been demonstrated by bikes like the Specialized Shiv, Felt IA etc. The UCI banning of beam bikes didn't stop the design being a very aerodynamic idea. The inherent aerodynamics of beam bikes, combined with the popularity of triathlon means that the time has become right for beam bikes to fly again and that is just what the Falco V is doing.

So that brings me to a good point about the Falco V and one of the questions I get asked a lot. Can you feel the beam flex, is it comfortable? Before I answer that, probably worth explaining some of the philosophy behind the Falco V, as I understand it. As far as I know, Falco went with a beam bike design for the aerodynamic benefits of it, rather than the comfort benefits. That isn't to say that the comfort benefits aren't there, but it isn't really what the bike is about. This bike is all about going fast. But more on that later.

So now that we have covered some of the history, time to move into the present with the Falco V.

First thing you notice when you look at the bike is that it is a fairly striking design. Damn awesome looking in my humble opinion. You roll into a race on this bike and you will be noticed, guaranteed.

 

My understanding is that most of the sharp angles etc are purely aesthetic. They don't make it go faster, but they don't make it go slower either and they do make it look pretty sweet, so why not.

You buy the Falco as a frame unit direct from Falco and so how the rest of the bike builds up really will depend on what components you choose to put on it. However, it is probably worth spending a bit of time focusing on a few of the features that every Falco comes with. So starting with the front and working our way back, here we go.

The fork is also produced by Falco and looks a bit like this

Nice aerodynamic blade shape, and you will see a short nose cone sitting in front of the headtube for added aerodynamic benefit. Falco has produced a white paper for this bike which goes into why they chose to go with a short nosecone. The white paper can be found here Falco V White Paper and is well worth a read. In these photos you can also see the behind the fork mounted TRP brake and the associated cable routing, but more on that later.

Looking up the bike slightly and you will find the headset and stem of the bike. What your front end looks like will depend a bit on what components you choose, but chances are it will look something like this. A couple of things to note here. I would love to have slammed my stem, but the routing of the front brake cable meant that I simply couldn't. Some stems will allow you to, but mine isn't one of them (my stem is very wide which is part of the problem). Something to be aware of if that slammed stem look is important to you.

Another important point to be aware of when selecting a stem is that there isn't a whole lot of room behind the stem as you can see in the photo below. The frame has a bit of a lump behind the head tube. Whilst this hump looks cool and it undoubtedly aero, it does restrict the room behind the stem somewhat. A standard, round backed stem should be fine, but it if it anything other than that, chances are it won't fit. The lump also makes mounting a bento box a real pain.

Moving back from the front end you have the beam, which is a very solid chunk of carbon. Unlike previous versions of beam bikes, the beam on the Falco isn't pivoted. This makes it stiffer through the beam than other designs. It also makes the frame quite tall. However, despite the tall frame my medium size Falco fits in my bike bag fine. I have a Biknd Helium which is quite a compact bike bag and despite that I have no problems.

Here you can see some of the details like the 'Vi Veri Veniversum Vivus Vici' written on the beam in Latin, which means something like 'By the power of truth, I, while living, have conquered the universe'. Nice little touch.

The seat post is a custom unit provided by Falco. Due to restrictions inherent to the frame design the post doesn't have all that much adjustment range. I didn't have to cut mine, but that was just luck, I suspect it will be necessary for some people.

The seat post is held in place by an internally mounted sliding binder type arrangement which is a design you are seeing more and more of these days. Basically you turn the screw that you can see in the photo below and it moves a slider inside the frame. As you tighten the screw the slide applies more pressure on the seat post. Hard to describe, but probably enough to know that it works well and holds the post very securely. One thing to be aware of though is that if you take the seat post out the little slider that is inside the frame will almost certainly fall out of its position and into the beam. It is quite easy to get out of the beam and back into position, so not a big deal, but definitely something to be aware of. When I recently traveled with this bike I had to take the seat post out to fit it in a bike bag. To make sure I didn't lose the little sliding binder I put some tape over the seat post hole to keep everything contained which worked fine.

Now, moving down to the bottom bracket. Down here you will find this bit sticking up in front of the back wheel:

This little post acts as a short cowling for the back wheel, as well as giving somewhere for the front mech to mount to. In front of the stumpy cowl you can see the mount for the Elite Crono CX drink bottle that comes standard with the frame and integrates with it very nicely. One thing that is a bit hard to make out in the above photo is that the mini-cowl isn't centrally mounted, rather it is slightly offset. The idea behind this is to try and direct the airflow over the bike away from the drive side of the bike. Another nice little touch.

Around this area you will also find a small hatch in the frame.

This is intended as a hidey hole for your shifter battery and can also be used as an access port to allow you to put some spares in the frame, which is exactly how I use it. I have had no problem putting a spare tube, levers and my CO2 inflator in there which lets me keep the frame nice and clean. One thing to note with this hatch is that due to the position of it and the bottle mount behind it, you can't get the hatch cover off without removing the bottle mount first. Not terribly useful in a race. For this reason I did my last race without the hatch cover in place. The Elite Crono CX bottle covers the open hatch very effectively, but it is less than ideal. 

Looking underneath you will find a bit of dirt and the bottom bracket mounted TRP rear brake.

The back brake also has a removable aero cowling to keep everything slick in the wind.

Further back again and you find a pair of absolutely massive chainstays.

When you don't have any seat stays, you are going to need a fair bit of carbon to keep your backside off the back wheel and a bunch of that carbon can be found in the seatstays and the bottom bracket. Chunky.

It is a bit hard to see in the above photo, but you can just make out the fact that the chainstay on the drive side is shaped to shield the rear cassette from the wind. Another of those nice small touches that I keep mentioning.

From the front it presents a nice clean profile to the wind.

Not much to see from the back.

Okay, so that is a general description. Now to answer a few of the common questions I have had about the bike.

Firstly, it is heavy?

Well yes and no. My bike is a medium frame and set up as you see it in these photos (except with standard Mavic Cosmic wheels) it weighs in at 9.2kg. That is with bottle mounts etc (and an Elite Crono XC bottle). It is true that 9.2kg is on the heavy side for a road bike, but it isn't that unusual for a TT bike. To give you an idea my 56cm P5 is also 9.2kg when it is set up with the same wheels etc. Yes I admit the P5 is not the lightest of TT bikes, but that doesn't stop it being very popular and very quick. So yes, this bike is no lightweight, but it isn't unusually heavy for a TT bike.

Is it flexy?

The best way to answer this question is to say that once you are on the bike, it feels like a normal frame. I have never really noticed the frame flexing.

I should add though that just because I haven't felt the frame flexing it doesn't mean that it isn't happening. Falco does claim that it will absorb some road vibration and I have no doubt that it does this. The only times I have really noticed the flex is when I have taken the odd big hit (like a pothole). When I have hit those big bumps I have noticed that the knock is not as severe as it would usually be. I suspect that is the flex coming into play. So yes, the beam does have some flex and you are getting some of that body saving shock absorption that beam bikes are famous for. However, this is not some noodly, bouncy beam bike. Day to day I challenge anyone to feel the beam move. This is no Softride. Stiff and solid are the impressions it gives you.

To the above statement, I should also say that just because you don't notice it move it doesn't meant that the people you ride with won't. When I ride the Falco V with other people I always get comments about the back wheel moving. I haven't seen it myself (I am working on getting some footage of it) but I gather that it looks like the top of the back wheel is moving from side to side on every pedal stroke. The first time I heard this I freaked out a bit and instantly assumed that I was on some noodly bike that was twisting under torque and stealing all my power. This led me to do a lot of reading into torsional and lateral stiffness in bikes and what exactly steals power, and also a bit of history around beam bikes. Now apparently the phenomenon I am describing was regularly seen in Softrides and there are a lot of people, who upon seeing the movement, made the same assumption I did, that it was causing power loss. However, it is important to understand which part of the bike has to be stiff for power transfer. For power transfer, lateral stiffness is what is important. This is the stiffness between the rear axle and the bottom bracket of the bike. If these two points are moving relative to each other then you are losing power. It is possible that flex in this area is what people are seeing from behind the Falco, but I highly doubt it. The Softride mentioned above was very stiff laterally, stiffer than most 'double diamond' bikes and everything I have felt (and looking at the amount of carbon involved) reassures me that the bottom bracket and chainstays on the Falco V are similarly stiff. What I think people are seeing from behind the bike is movement of the seat, via the beam, relative to the rear wheel. From what I have read it would seem that whilst this movement is disconcerting to see (you can't feel it) in reality there is very minimal power loss associated with it. If there is any impact from this movement it will be on bike handling, which I have to say, I haven't really noticed. So be warned, you will get a lot of comments, but be assured, this bike is stiff where it needs to be.

If it is stiff, does that mean it will crack and snap and kill me?

This is a question I specifically asked Falco and the response I got is that the frame is so over-engineered that it is several times stronger than it is required to be. Testing has been done to confirm this. So no, it shouldn't snap and drop you into the back wheel.

Now for some more general questions.

Does the bike fit fat rims?

Easy one. Yes it does. One of the advantages of the TRP brakes (like any mechanical brake) is that they have a massive range of adjustment. This means it is very easy to fit fat bike wheels to this bike. Of course the brakes are only part of the equation, the frame has to have clearance too, which the Falco V does. The Caden wheels on the bike in these photos have a 26mm wide braking surface, which is about as wide as wheels get at the moment. The tyres mounted are 23C. As you can see in the below photos there is plenty of clearance.

 

 How is the braking performance of the behind the fork brake?

Fine is the answer to this one. I have never ridden a bike with behind the fork brakes before and I definitely had my reservations. I have read stories of reduced braking power and I was having nightmares of combining this reduced braking power with carbon brake surfaces. Turns out though that I didn't really need to worry. I haven't had any problems with braking at all. I gather that the performance of behind the fork brakes depends a lot on how well they were installed and I guess Churchill did a good job with mine, because they work fine.


Anything you aren't happy with?

If I am honest, yes there are a couple of things.


Firstly, while the behind the fork brake works fine, I am not convinced that it is the best solution aerodynamically. I can't help but see the big cable sticking out there in the wind.

I suspect I could route this cable slightly better, but it is an issue that is inherent with this kind of brake. I would love to see this bike with a lovely slick integrated front brake type fork. Or even a sensibly designed front mount brake, which can be made very aerodynamic these days. As I have said, the brake works fine, but I can't help but think there is a better solution.

I would also love to see a cleaner solution for cable routing. The bike does a pretty good job with cable routing but it isn't perfect. No matter what components you put on the bike you will probably  end up with something like this:

I will admit that this nest of cables would have been improved if I had used electronic gears, but there still would have been the rear brake cable. Without going with a fully integrated front end it is very hard to make the cables completely invisible and so perhaps this is the price you pay for the convenience of not having a fully integrated front end. Coming from my P5 though, it has been one of the biggest differences and I can't help but notice it.

That is about it though.

So now for the big questions.

How does it ride?

The short answer for this question is well.

The longer answer is below.

My previous bike was a Cervelo P5 and for whatever reason the Falco just feels more comfortable. I don't mean from a flexi-beam perspective, but rather from a 'this bike fits me' perspective. Perhaps it is just the bike fit (although I had the P5 fitted too) but for some reason I just feel a lot more at home on the Falco. I suspect the frame geometry suits my body shape more. The comfort I feel on this bike may not be the same for every person, after all we are all different shapes and sizes, but for me it fits like a glove.

Because the bike fits me better, the handling feels better. I have never had the slightest issue with the handling of the Falco V. From the first part of the first ride I felt right at home, happy to take the usual fast corners quickly. That is an impressive feat for a TT bike, which don't always turn corners happily. There is definitely no quirky beam bike handling, no the wheels going one way and your body another type feeling.

I mentioned previously about flex in the beam, or lack of it. Whilst I don't doubt that there is some movement in beam, one place that there is very little flex is the bottom bracket. Something I noticed right away when I started riding this bike is the stiffness of the bottom bracket. Stiff bottom brackets are not unusual in TT bikes, which are designed to get every bit of your power to the road, and the Falco V is no different. I would even go so far as to say that the bottom bracket of the Falco felt stiffer than the bottom bracket on my P5, which is saying something because the P5 is one stiff bike. I have nothing to base this on other than my seat of the pants feel, but certainly on my first ride one of the things I noticed was just how much of the road I was feeling through the pedals as the frame transmitted a lot of the road vibrations through the stiff bottom bracket.

Now for the last big big question.

Is it fast?

YES!!!

Yes it is quick. I unfortunately don't have a wind tunnel to confirm any of this in so I just have to rely on my seat of the pants impressions and my experience on the bike. However, I have now ridden the Falco V enough in training and racing to say this is a quick bike. How quick? Well, as a benchmark I would say that the Falco V is at least as fast as my old P5. That sounds like a bit of an underwhelming statement, but at the pointy end of bike design the differences between the really top designs is measured in one or two percent, or even fractions of a percent. The Falco V was never going to blow a top bike like a P5 out of the water. In fact, having it match the P5 is impressive enough, given that the P5 is acknowledged as one of the fastest TT bikes available on the market. All the testing and riding I have done though does indeed indicate that the Falco V is at least equal to this market leader. For me that is an impressive feat.

On top of that, from what I am seeing in training, the Falco V seems to really shine in higher yaw angles. Not crazy high yaw angles, but in that classic 10 degrees cross-head wind type situation it really seems to fly. It just doesn't seem to feel the wind that much. From reading the Falco V white paper, it doesn't seem like this high yaw angle performance is an accident.

So yes, the bike is quick. Throw a disc on it and it is almost ridiculously quick.

Probably worth expanding on that slightly. From what I understand about beam bikes they really benefit from having a disc on them. The lack of seat tube reduces the drag of the frame, but it also means that there is nothing for the back wheel to hide behind. The Falco has that mini cowl coming up from the bottom bracket which reduces this impact a bit. But all the same, this is a bike where your back wheel choice will have more impact on your speed that for a normal bike.

Well, I think that is everything. The Falco V is a bike that I was unsure of to start with, but which has grown on me since. Proving itself to me in training and racing. A bike that puts science and the quest for speed well before conventional looks. Something about that philosophy really appeals to me. I am very happy to be riding this bike.