Let $(a,b,c)$ be the sides of a triangle and let its circumradius be $1$. Is it true that
$$ a^c + b^c - c^c < \pi $$
My progress: In the special case where at least two of the three sides are equal, I have been able to show that the upper bound is about $3.13861$. If two sides are equal and the third side is $c = x$ then the length of the two equal side are $a = b = \sqrt{2 + \sqrt{4-x^2}}$ each. Maximizing the expression using Wolfram Alpha
$$ 2\left(\sqrt{2 + \sqrt{4-x^2}}\right)^x - x^x $$
gives $3.13861$ as the upper bound in this case. Further more, simulation show that this is also the unconditional maxima but I have not been able to prove it. Since $3.13861$ is very close to $\pi$ so, I expressed the above inequality in terms of $\pi$ to present it in an elegant form but it seems the proximity is just a coincidence unless I am missing something.
The three vertices of any such triangle can be taken to be on the unit circle; without loss of generality, one of them can always be $(1,0)$. Therefore the entire configuration space of triangles can be parametrized by two angles $x$ and $y$, with the other two vertices being $(\cos x,\sin x)$ and $(\cos y,\sin y)$. This is a very reasonable numerical optimization problem, and Mathematica finds the maximum value to be about $3.1386122590888217$ when $x=-1.5106639429716202$ and $y=2.3862607049785898$, which is to say when the three vertices are $(1,0)$, $(0.060096151557482914, -0.9981925929238206)$, and $(-0.728044022440954, 0.6855303796244158)$. (The lengths of the sides of this triangle are $1.8590556694615026$, $1.8590556863316139$, and $1.3710607925562726$, so perhaps the optimal triangle is really isosceles and the accuracy isn't as good as the decimal places indicate.) I strongly suspect that the maximum value is some random transcendal number having nothing to do with $\pi$ or any other constant we've ever seen.