[sealdavid]

Can someone tell me if this asymetric frame mumbo jumbo is just marketing talk or if it really makes a difference?

I watched a video which purported to explain it, but the logic was as follows:

1. The forces are different side to side. 2. The bike has less room on one side due to cogs and other stuff. 3. So we made it asymetric. 4. Which is obviously better.

They seem to be missing a step between 3 and 4.

This kind of reminds me of the Southpark episode where the underpants gnomes would steal underwear, then they had a missing step, which if they completed would lead to them making lots of money. None of the underpants gnomes knew what the second step was. It was hilarious.

Are Pinnarello being underpants gnomes with me? I'd really like to know. I am considering their bikes, along with others...

I haven't yet read of anyone raving about how asymetric their bike is...

 

[Mapei]

Asymmetric bicycle frames, most particularly when it comes to chainstays, have been around for years. I believe (but can't be certain) that my buddy's 1972 Ron Cooper frame has asymmetric stays. I do know for certain that my Time Edge Translink (circa 2006) has asymmetric chainstays. It's never been common, which probably means the benefits are either absent or negligible or not worth the expense, They are, however, truly cool to look at.

 

[one80]

I know what you mean

1. Build asymmetric frame
2. ?
3. Profit

It seems they've done well at step 3, though I agree with above - if there was a noticeable difference, I'm sure every manufacturer would be jumping on the bandwagon.

 

[rhauft]

More than anything else, it is a high-tech weight savings feature (or gimmick).
Similar to triple or double butting mettle tube sets or spokes. By manipulating the individual carbon tubes & stays they reinforce high stress drive side areas and reduce wall thickness on non-drive/lower stress areas. Not something one would tangibly feel and brag to their riding mates about.