Fizik has announced the new Tempo Overcurve R4 performance road shoe, including two new iridescent options. The new model sits alongside the existing Tempo Overcurve R5 in the range.
"The unique asymmetrical Overcurve shape enabled Fizik’s designers to create a shoe that has a classic performance road shoe aesthetic, but based on a contemporary construction design and techniques," says Fizik.
"Fizik’s Overcurve construction features a staggered collar that wraps around the ankle, tracing the natural misalignment of the ankle’s two bony protrusions: the lateral and medial malleoli. This creates an asymmetrical shape, with the throat of the shoe curving over the foot from its outside to its inner side.
The upper is made from a polyurethane laminated material combined with a comfortable, flexible, lightweight mesh. It uses a Boa-controlled closure system while the outsole is a medium-stiffness carbon blend (it's 15% carbon-fibre).
"The cleats are positioned slightly rear-wards compared to traditional settings, to optimise pedalling efficiency and reduce knee compression," says Fizik. "It is well suited to aggressive, forward aero positions."
The Tempo Overcurve R4 is available now in a choice of four colorways. The classic black/black and white/black are priced £194.99, while the iridescent bronze and iridescent green options are £209.99, either through dealers or direct from www.fizik.com.
Add new comment
80 comments
you know that electric cars were some of the first ever invented . It was only the oligarchs who were getting rich form oil who instigated the mainstream use of oil driven transport . You do know those same rich family’s run and own all these so called environmental companies , etc wwf green peace ( have been taken over ) they are all pushing the climate change narrative, these are the same cunts who made electric cars redundant when motor transport came in to existence. You know Marcus strong formed the “ governmental” IPCC ,check him out ,he’s a oligarchs best friend . You know the remit of the IPCC is only the impact made by man on the climate. So all other forms of effects are not looked into . You know about climate gate and the way the data was altered and the fact that Phil Jones and his colleague were found guilty of fraudulent science but didn’t get prosecution because of the statute of limitations. You do know al gore has made over $100 million Dollars since is bullshit film working with the likes of Enron etc etc and has bought 2 house ,one on in san fransico and one a bit further north ,both in the exact place where by his bullshit science ,should both be under water right now .
Now check this out and tell the world the truth . Learn the truth .https://www.corbettreport.com/episode-282-the-ipcc-exposed/
So many words and so many falsehoods, you must have worked hard on the one Xena
show me a false hood . Show me one ? Did you look at the link about the ipcc ? You obviously didn’t. Before you post with your mouth look at the link . Then post again and apologies will be accepted.
First electric cars yhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_car.
Got that as well .
Al gore http://www.globalwarming.org/2009/04/28/gores-inconvenient-enron/
If the ocean’s rising, why is Al Gore in Montecito?
In response to the recent fanatical post by a global warming drone who fears that the rising tides will drown mankind, let him take solace in the fact that his climate guru, Al Gore, recently bought a $9 million beach front home in Montecito. Guess Al is not really afraid of sinking into the sea.
Climate gate ,take a look . https://archive.org/details/TheCorbettReport-Episode110a-Climategate
No false hoods , your brainwashed by the mainstream media not me .
Have this one as well , ipcc’s mr Mann getting is arse kicked in a court of law https://principia-scientific.org/michael-mann-faces-bankruptcy-as-his-co...
wake the fuck up , stop watching the bbc and if you going to open your mouth make sure you know what you talking about . Take a look at all the links or stay ignorant. It’s your choice bro .
Such a shame that those 99% of climate scientists don't have the benefit of your expertise and knowledge.
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2019/jul/24/scientific-consensus-on-...
https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_consensus_on_climate_change
https://futurism.com/climate-change-caused-humans
Look at the links then comment . Look at this https://www.corbettreport.com/episode-282-the-ipcc-exposed/ Look at the links Oh here’s your NASA buddies cooking the climate books https://youtu.be/Xpx27-00NgE Facts you are relying on MSM source these are not the facts . Are you scared to look at the links I have posted. It’s ok to be wrong , and you are . The things you have posted , if you look at my links it show them to be altered,fraudulent. Have you heard of climate gate for instance ,,,,,,, Comment again after watching all my links or just go away and stay ignorant .
Oh good grief... Denying human effect on the climate changes is analogous to declaring belief in a flat earth.
You don't deny a more-or-less spherical earth, do you?
look at the links I posted , to scared to ? if your going to make a comment look at the links i posted or shut the fuck up and keep your fairy tales ideology to yourself . I’m 100% right and your a ignorant bbc MSM news bitch. This is the trouble with MSM news believing idiots , your so confident in what you are told that you will sprout any old shit you are told . Try doing some research for yourself .if you want the truth most of the time you have to look for it yourself .
Now you can post some more uneducated brainwashed comments or you can look at the links I have posted and apologies will be accepted. But your probably the kind of person who never admits they are wrong so will ignore the links I posted which have FACTUAL PROOF and carry on living in MSM bitch world .
It's annoying how many easily-fooled sheep there are out there who take their world view from crackpot youtube videos while thinking they are being super clever and know 'the truth'. I know a guy who keeps citing Alex Jones and insisting he has 'the truth they don't want you to know', unaware he's just swallowing rubbish that 'they' want him to believe.
Go educate yourself - take some degree or, better still, postgrad-level courses in atmospheric physics, for example, then maybe you'll have some understanding of the topic and won't be such an easy mark for charlatans with YouTube accounts. YouTube is not a peer-reviewed science journal.
(Are you American, or just one of the British sheep who have recently been suckered by mad right-wing US propaganda? Your use of the term 'MSM' certainly suggests a sheep-like mentality, and the delusional belief that Al Gore is somehow central to the topic of climate science seems to be weirdly common among right-wing Americans. Clue: What Al Gore does has no bearing whatsoever on the reality of CO2-driven-climate-change)
The use of all-caps and the mis-spelling of "you're" also seems indicative of the type.
I also genuinely wonder how much this lunacy comes, ultimately, from Putin? American liberals often seem to trace it back to the Russians, but I sometimes wonder if their fixation on Russian influence isn't, ironically, getting into the same territory as the right-wing obsession with conspiracies. It's certainly ironic how unpatriotic both the UK and US right have become - both now owe their first allegiance to foreigners.
What bugs me with so many of the conspiracy theorists is that they only seem to link to videos as their source of truth. Most of the time, I can't be bothered to listen to a video, so I'd much rather have the argument along with references in a textual format instead. It's a lot easier to deconstruct an argument when it's clearly and unambiguously stated which is probably why they prefer to stick to producing videos where they can chain together a bunch of unrelated assumptions and reach their conclusion.
Something else that I've noted is that most of the people claiming to be revealing The Truth always have some secret info that they are not willing to share (or not unless money changes hands first).
I used to work alongside a bloke who was deep into his counter-culture theories and was a huge fan of chem-trails and perpetual motion machines amongst other things. Whenever I tried to get him down to the basic facts there was always some reason that the data couldn't be published. He was also a big fan of RT News which James Corbett (as linked to by Xena) has been accused of having links with.
The biggest mistake the theorists make is resorting to the "show me a falsehood" defence as though it is up to logical minded people to disprove unusual claims rather than the "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" school of thought.
Xena's right about the electric cars though they would have sucked with the battery technology at the time.
BBC4 had a documentary about the early history of the automobile last week.
It covered the steam cars and the early electric cars, as well as the development of petrol cars.
We'll pass over it not mentioning the role of cyclists in campaigning for tarmac roads (the programme simply said the roads were rubbish, because they were only used by pedestrians and horse-carts, hence why cars weren't taken up so quickly), but it did say the reason early electric cars didn't take off (so to speak) was that batteries at the time were utterly rubbish!
Would that have been "Revolutions: The Ideas that Changed the World"? https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m000775k/revolutions-the-ideas-that-changed-the-world-series-1-2-the-car
If so, I'll give that a watch - some of the early 20's cars just looked fantastic.
Its definitely worth a watch - if you can get over Jim al Khalili looking like he's narrating into a webcam
ktache has addressed the main gripes I had with the programme. I mean, I was under the impression that bicycle mechanics/mechanisms were used in early cars: last time I checked, we didn't go straight from horse-and-cart to motor car...
Oh, absolutely agree. They always seem to prefer videos to text, and I can't be arsed watching videos - give me a written argument, thanks.
It might partly be because the audience for these things just aren't very literate, but I really think there's some sort of power-trick involved as well (possibly a financial issue also, given how YouTube and such platforms measure 'hits').
I've struggled to explicate why I find their habit of linking to videos so intensely annoying - there's something arrogant about presenting your argument in that form, there's a kind of ego-issue involved. It's forcing the person you are arguing with to act like a docile 'audience', putting them in a one-down position where they have to sit there passively as you lecture them. Reading a textual arugment is a more engaged process.
What I remember about electric cars is that the early idea was that they would be aimed at women, who would be appropriately clean and quiet, while men drove the manly dirty petrol vehicles.
Oh, I am so sorry - I hadn't realised that you were a 'Merican True Believer. We probably ought to have realised earlier, and then we could have used short words and simple sentences so you'd understand
I was under the impression that Ride London is a large event which takes place every year, and which was covered on the BBC FFS.
You'd think a resident of London, and a resident whose home apparently lies within the area affected, might have noticed it before, and/or read any warning notices put up around the city?
(We really need a road.cc emoji thing for "face-palm").
What she really means: "I'm not used to being told 'no' and completely overreacted".
I think we should appropriate her unintentional neologism and term any argument with an ignorant driver an "autocation".
I see Elaine Paige has realised what a bafoon she has made of herself and has deleted her tweet. If only there was a way to avoid such tripe, such as learning a few facts rather than thinking you are more privileged because you sang a bit and have a radio show with a play list of luvvie show songs...
I wonder if she feels the same way about the London Marathon, or some Pride event or any other event that our capital hosts that means a few roads are closed on a Sunday for a few hours, possibly with SOME participants not owning cars and therefore not paying said ‘road tax’?
#bigot
funnily enough the original Tweet from Elaine Paige no longer exists...
... but her inadvertent portmanteau 'Autocation' will live forever.
I had one just an hour ago with a Post Office van. When the driver got out of his van in a threatening way it turned into a bit of a mailstrom.
Spent the weekend in London visiting friends, right inside the zone affected by the road closures. We still managed to drive to Wisley botanic gardens and back in time to watch the race go past the end of the road. Later cycled across to Esher to watch them on the way back in.
I'd have to say that the stewards, especially the chap at the roundabout where we watched from put up good naturedly with a quite a bit of unpleasant abuse from motorists unable to read or understand the clear signs notifying them of the road closures.
I expect some of them have never paid VAT on a bicycle and therefore have no right to using the road, or some other nonsensical tax bollocks.
Pages