The guy took 7 months to design this on his computer, shit with enough money he could have friggin built a real one in that time
That’s Ken Denny’s. He has two (road and track). Interesting guy, quite a character and has some of the wildest and best presented bicycles I’ve ever seen. Dude knows how to turn out a bike and this was way before the whole world cottoned onto bikes as porn. Lucky to have met him and boy did he turn up on one of the sweetest old Holdsworth’s I’ve ever seen … Harden bacon slicer’s, Bluemels fenders, cotton shellacked bars etc etc … Master, and worth looking out for if you’re ever in Boston.
With regard to what Blakey said about aero and body positioning >> x 1000. The actual bike is such a small portion of drag compared to the rider. Hand positions, elbows, flappy clothing … you name it, way more important that rim section, cable routing. Too many people’s focus on the bike (weight, aero, stifness etc) when the biggest and most vital factor is the rider.
As regards the Laser, - Ii’ve drooled for many years over them. Knowing a bit more about how and what they were made of has made me feel deceived, followed by meh.
What a frame is made of is unimportant, if you like the way it looks it will be faster. 
I have heard rumours (probably from you) that the laser’s awesomeness stops at it’s appearance, that it is a bit of a noodle - can you enlighten us a little more regarding the myth?
Agree that body position has a bigger impact on drag than frame and wheels, buy when you have reached your optimum position, the rest of your equipment is the place to turn. Back in the day lasers might’ve been sold to people who had eeked out every last point of advantage in their position and therefore wanted the benefit of nicer trailing edges of the frame and cleaner cable routing, etc. This time round nobody who wants to go fast will ride it, full stop.
I’ll agree on this point. Colour is more important than anything. If you like the way it looks your mind will have you believe it’s the greatest bike ever.
Also, materials can be made to function differently than we usually categorize them so assuming a frames characteristics by whether it’s made of steel/alu/ti/carbon etc is usually a generalization. Design is ahead of materials.
Don’t recall ever saying it rode like a noodle (I do like “noodly” bikes though).
This is one big kettle of fish and I don’t have any first hand knowledge or riding experience. I have heard that it is heavy (lots of bondo and brass filler) but for time trial bikes of this era it was never much of a concern (some would say even for today).
It is quite something to look at. In it’s time it blew everyone away and was almost a perfectly sculpted form. Quite simply there was nothing like it. For good reason it remains one of the only bicycles to the in the permanent collection of the MOMA design collection. Along with the Noguchi table and the iPod. To the non cyclist and even many cyclists it remains as a beautiful piece of design as to those who don’t know much about bikes it looks killa fast bro.
But my argument would be that it’s not Modernist. Form does not follow function, just made to appear that way rather than paired down to the essence. Beneath the skin it’s also quite clumsy especially on the road versions where such things as cable routing and component functions are rather quite crude. Then again it won’t have been the only item ever to achieve cult status based solely on it’s appearance (and that’s my other point … if there is one). Just 'cos it looks aero doesn’t mean it is.
One well known frame builder and restorer had this to say …
In my opinion the stupidest frames ever made.
Oh yeah, and it’s not bondo … it’s Stucco metallico poliestere a spatola con relativo catalizzatore. Tipo fine.
allchem
So have I dissed it enough?
Whilst I might be meh, I’d own one in a second if I could - I’m a sucker for pretty things.
One day I’ll try to one up the Cinelli Laser by designing an aero bike inspired by Dr. Seuss.
From Eurobike via Velonews:
well that’s pretty underwhelming…
I want to build one up with Deltas, so I can have the prettiest/dumbest bike of all.
Yuck. People want the original not some piss-take.
What’s the problem- looks okay to me. And looks are the only concern with this bike right?
those bullhorns are fugz.
I’m just all about the 1" threaded .
This. Would have looked better with a threaded record headset & one of the re-release 1A stems
+1 ^
I’m with you. Considering it’s a modern re-release of a classic bike this looks great! It could be alot worse.
It’ll sell. It was never going to be the original!
Fuck dude… you need to issue a warning with that… I’m still recovering from that last time I saw it. 
throw on some drops and i’m sold.
agree threaded > threadless (cosmetically), but they’re never going to release a new bike with threaded.
Concurring with others: the threadless just looks all wrong. But not as wrong as that Merckx…
what a let down. dont re-release something and make it worse. Either go all out new school or keep it classy, dont try to go half way in between.
That bar and stem set is fucking ugly as is the saddle and seatpost combo. plus horizontal top tube, black headset and wort of all: no double disc-wtf!? more like Cinelli Lazier
awesome.