If Mavrick had a bike, I imagine this is the one he would ride into the Danger Zone. Dimond Bikes’s made-in-USA carbon frames have only been around since 2013, but they arrived carrying a very big beam stick. In addition to impressive wind-tunnel results, this past October, Dimond pro Maik Twelsiek delivered the best bike split of the day at The Kona Ironman World Championships giving this new brand some serious street cred.

See why these bikes are so freaking fast and some of the custom paint jobs they can do for you…

photos c.of Dimond Bikes

We first saw Dimond bikes a couple of years ago. The direct to consumer brand was born when pro Triathlete TJ Tollakson and former Zipp engineer David Morse started off trying to come up with a new hydration system. In what was an ironic series of events the two friends who were both well established in all things aero in the cycling industry, they got started with a wedding gift. The “something old, something new” got taken to a new level in 2010 when Morse gave Tollakson something “old”… in cycling terms, REALLY old. An early to mid 90’s Zipp 2001 frame, (pictured above with a Dimond decal). They took the 17+ year old frame that was designed for a 7 speed drivetrain and modified it to fit current tech. Check out that 1-inch headtube! Though a few cogs old, the “2001” was still considered one of the fastest frames available.

Every Dimond frame is designed and manufactured in Des Moines, IA. Though not a “diamond” frame, according to their website,

“It takes heat, pressure and carbon to make a diamond gemstone. Similarly, it takes heat, pressure, and carbon to create the Dimond bicycle. While the physical similarities between the two may end there, one thing is certain; with a Dimond bike, you can be brilliant under pressure.”


Super fork-2

RLozier-1305-Edit RLozier-1326-Edit

Their new flagship, the Dimond Brilliant adds their new Superfork to their already fast Dimond Express frame. The Superfork uses a magnetic cover on the fork that can be easily removed but stays on while riding. The Superfork houses either TriRig Omega or Omega X brakes and keeps them protected from the wind. But the removable cover should make the brakes easy to access for maintenance. The Dimond comes built with 2 optional kits including a Race Build with Ultegra Di2 ($9,875) or the Premium Build with Dura Ace Di2 ($13,595). It is also available as a frameset with the Superfork ($6,850). While you’re at it, since it’ll just be a drop in the bucket at this point, custom paint can be had starting at $500.


The slightly more budget friendly Dimond Express loses the Superfork for a 3T Funda aero fork. The Express is available as a frameset ($4,000) or complete with an Ultegra Di2 kit ($5,950), and comes in any color you want as long as it’s black.

Diamond Bikes Aero Graph

Ironman course time savings over our closest competitors:

Average Wind Yaw Cervélo P5-3 Specialized Shiv
1min 46sec 4min 46sec
2min 30sec 4min 56sec
10° 1min 21sec 4min 13sec
15° 4min 31sec 3min 50sec

Their detailed wind tunnel test put the Dimond Express up against some of the big players and shows some significant results. The bike’s design obviously shines when there is any sort of side wind…. which unless you’re on a straight road with either a perfect head or tail wind, is what really matters. Regardless of what any data says, they seem to be backing it up in the field where it counts.


The Dimond family of bikes come in XS, S, M & L, but have a short headtube allowing a wide range of stack height and fit options. Check out some of the custom paint options as well as a video on their backstory below.

Diamond Bikes Custom 1

Diamond Bikes Custom
Photo and build of the yellow/blue Dimond c. ACME Bicycle CO., Brooklyn NY



  1. So much wrong with this comparison info. They tested this bike in the tunnel at 30mph? That is nowhere close to realistic – pros can barely average 20mph. The P5 is a good bike (not the fastest, but good) but the only other comparison bike is a Shiv? Aerodynamically, the Shiv is a joke in the Tri world. Specialized even admitted that their new Venge is more aero than the Shiv. Come on, actually test this thing under realistic conditions and with actual class leaders in aerodynamics, then I’ll start paying attention.

      • so the fastest times at the biggest peak of the year at a fast course was ~24.8mph…again, not realistic for 99.9% of all riders and still a FAR cry from the 30mph quoted in the wind tunnel test. Plus, one additional unrealistic factor is that the tests were done with bike only (so no rider).

        • well, you said that pro’s can barely average 20mph. At Kona (not an easy course) they’re right around 4.5hrs. In Texas they’re closer to 4 (4:10 being the fastest) which is just about 27mph.

          you also said the Shiv is a joke in the tri-world. seeing as last year’s Kona bike count top 3 were…

          Cervélo – 522
          Trek – 275
          Specialized – 218

          I think it’s incredibly obvious why they picked the bikes they did. If you actually do some research, you’d know that the shiv is not an aero joke. look at slowtwitch dot com. It’s right there in the thick of things with all the other “superbikes”.

          This isn’t a personal attack, just refuting some unfounded statements.

          • The Shiv is popular but it’s not very fast anymore. It was a superbike but it really isn’t anymore.
            Cervelo is adamant about their bike being comparably better WITH a rider. So yeah, the shaping of this thing is so different, you really need to see numbers WITH a rider. If it proves better, then we’ll know but it’ll too different to make any assumptions.

        • They were testing the Shiv Tri, which is much slower at low yaw angles than the UCI-legal Shiv that the Worldtour riders use in time trials.

          BTW – You test at 30mph because that is usually about the minimum most windtunnels can handle and still get repeatable data.

          Testing with a rider makes some sense, but the problem is that every rider is different, so what position do you choose? AND, getting a living rider to position themselves exactly the same on each bike is almost impossible.

          • You don’t need a living rider. Set bikes up with equivalent bar and seat position and use a dummy, preferably pedaling. Most of the numbers I’ve seen show very little variation from the effect of different people on the same bike so long as the thing fits. It’s more about seeing how the bike reacts with the legs, the upper body has very little effect on the bikes drag

          • Obviously since the Diamond is a Tri bike and very few people do triathlons with the Shiv TT. I had a Shiv TT for two years…won a bunch with it. It was definitely fast but I always hated it. Worst riding TT bike I’ve ever owned

    • im a noob in mtb appareil on a cross bike with a huge backpack and i average 21mph in windi-ish conditions (im relatively fit mind you – but nothing close to pros)

      no doubt a pro with actual aero gear can do close to 30 avg.

      • ya, I’m calling you out. Sorry, but there’s no way you average 21mph with a backpack and baggier clothes for triathlon distances (56 or 112 miles).

        • “Sorry, but there’s no way you average 21mph with a backpack and baggier clothes for triathlon distances (56 or 112 miles).”

          Not all triathlons are half-ironmans or ironmans.

    • Unlike Bottom Bracket sizes, with wind tunnel testing there is an industry standard; and it has been 30mph/50kph for well over 10 years. Your criticism of dimond for using 30mph is more reflective of your ignorance than of their poor testing, Zipp, Hed, Cervelo, Specialized, Trek and many others have all settled on using 30mph because the data that results scales very well to 20-27mph but is much more repeatable and consistent. Many of them expirement with slower speeds or use them as part of their reports but almost all of their qualitative testing is done at 30mph.

    • Maybe you ought to have a chat with Craig Alexander, who rides on Specialized Shiv, and let him know the bike he rides on is a joke in the Tri world.

    • I think Boom, you are a little off. Kona bike speeds for the pro’s are well over 20. I am a 45 + age grouper and average 21. This year Patrick Lange averaged almost 26 mph. I agree there should be more bikes compared and now with the P5X the game has changed but to say the pro’s barely average 20mph is just way off.

  2. 30mph is most often used for bikes in wind tunnels because the drag difference between competitors gets larger. Margin for error stays the same, essentially making the test more accurate. The air’s behavior us essentially the same at either speed. Why don’t they test at even higher speeds, such as 100mph? Don’t know. I do know that at speeds approaching 200mph, air starts behaving differently…

  3. Why are they comparing the Dimond against an obselete bike in the P5-3? Seems a more accurate test would be to put it up against a bike that actually exists. Ohhhhhhhhhh….I get it now.

  4. I would love to see this scenario: 10 athlete, all with some triathlon experience none of them Pro. 5 men and 5 woman. It doesn’t matter their fitness and the goal is to try and achieve their best times with their own tri bike and on a reasonably fitted Dimond on the same stretch of road (not very long, perhaps 8-10 miles each way). They will be let loose at 1 minute intervals on their fitted Dimond and record the result. Allow them to rest, to be fed and then again, same format, on their own bicycles.
    At the end do a simple comparison and see if there are any difference in performance.
    Yes ………. I know this is some silly test, however it will allow to prove with a relative degree of accuracy if all that is claimed is true. At the end of the day all that comes down is what we (normal athletes) can do on race day which is relatively standard each race due to family, work, little training time, weather for some…….. Rarely you see one shaving a big chunk of time from one race to another just based on pure performance. We all have good guidance to get fit for an IM for example, we have our dedication and we use whatever equipment we buy that is then adjusted to the best knowledge of the fitting tech we choose.
    In my humble opinion this would be a reasonable way to find a true base in performance comparison. Forget all the other nonsense which is mostly a marketing tool.

COMMENT HERE: (For best results, log in through Wordpress or your social media account. Anonymous/fake email comments may be unapproved or deleted. ALL first-time commenter's posts are held for moderation. Check our Comment Policy for full details.)

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.