Very Happy with the Meivici...

[Argos]

It could have been this!
http://www.cyclingnews.com/photos/2005/tech/news/aug26/diamas_2006web.jpg
It is the new Seven Diamas. Their custom Carbon offering for this year.

[Argos]

Just so we are clear, I think this is Super Ugly.

[TimD]

... but it may also be fast :)

While we're off the topic of Serotta, I saw another Seven Alaris SG the other day. That is one sweeeeeet machine, and I'd like to ride one.

TimD

[Argos]

Think about some of the weird geometry you see on some Serotta's. Now think of that applied here... EXTRA long HT Extension, awkward sloping TT's, etc.... I'm sure the Meivici is Fast. I'm sure the Daimas is fast. I just think it's Ugly.

[Sandy]

I have never seen a Seven that looks anything like this bike. Custom? Fully custom? Doesn't look it. Very aggressive looking, and obviously much different looking than the Meivici. I actually think that it looks rather neat. Perhaps, not what I would choose, but very aggressive and sleek looking, communicating speed. I wonder ...... You know what I wonder....

Thanks for a look at the new Seven.


Sandy

[Fixed]

Bro. looks like a t.t. bike. Cheers

[Argos]

Am I the only one that thinks it's ugly? Look at the fork! They put no thought into that! If you like the frame, will you at least say that the Fork doesn't go with it?!?! Someone throw me a bone!

[Sandy]

It certainly does.


Sandy

[Sandy]

Actually, I was looking at the overall look of the bike. I just looked at the fork more closely. Yep, I agree the fork does not look very good, especially with the rest of the bike. Yep, the fork does not go with the frame.


Sandy

[Fixed]

Am I the only one that thinks it's ugly? Look at the fork! They put no thought into that! If you like the frame, will you at least say that the Fork doesn't go with it?!?! Someone throw me a bone!
Good point Bro. and what's up with that head tube looks like jaws. Cheers

[Smiley]

Goes back to what our good friend Brian Smith stated on another thread about everything Carbone ... He said to the effect that Carbon today is BLACK GOLD to the bike industry . Wow , how true does these words sound in light of this offering from Seven and what Serotta has done . I am already planning a trip to Vegas for interbike to just go and see what all the offerings in Carbone are from each bike company . I still can't get a warm and fuzzy feeling about CARBONE and its hard for me to embrace it as something I like to ride . Sorry carbone freaks out there , the Ottrott has as much carbone as I want to have .

[csb]

Someone throw me a bone!

_________ that was the sound of a bone landing
way out in a field of tall grass near the edge of the woods.

[Birddog]

My first thought was that it looked like Cervelo P3 on steroids. I agree, kinda fugly, but someone will like it.

Birddog

[csb]

no, actually it's the sound of a bike landing in the road-side
grass having been hurled there by a certain bj riis

[Jeff N.]

Bro. looks like a t.t. bike. CheersYes, it looks well suited to TT/Tri work. I think it looks B-B-B-B-B-Bad! No wait...theres that integrated headset.....NEVERMIND, its UGLY!!!!! Jeff N.

[BumbleBeeDave]

. . . this paint job helps it at all. But as a bike, yes it does look distinctly like a TT ride. But regardless of what it's intended for, the head tube/fork area looks particularly unnattractive--too bulky around the head tube for no particular aerodynamic or mechanical reason that I can see. I also wonder about the seatpost--does it HAVE a seatpost? It looks almost like a cartoon bike you'd see in a Power Rangers type kids show. I'm sure it IS fast, though.

Oh, well . . . I'm also sure it would look MUCH better in black and yellow! ;)

BBDave

[Too Tall]

Rubber biscuit.

Visually it would hold together [better] using an Alphaq TT fork.

[Frustration]

This is reported to be @ 4k cheaper than the Meivici. It will be interesting to see how custom you can get.

It's sure a different way to go...

[davids]

... but it may also be fast :)

While we're off the topic of Serotta, I saw another Seven Alaris SG the other day. That is one sweeeeeet machine, and I'd like to ride one.

TimD
The Alaris SG is on my short list! I'm not sure what to make of the Diamas. It looks like a slightly melted Cervelo... Maybe if it was less black? :confused:

[JohnS]

I just realized that the weird paint job is actually the Seven logo with all the parts that wouldn't fit on the frame, deleted. I vote for UGLY! :)

[bulliedawg]

I just realized that the weird paint job is actually the Seven logo with all the parts that wouldn't fit on the frame, deleted. I vote for UGLY! :)

Wow! Your right! I don't see this bike on their website.

[Smiley]

All Carbone bikes are starting to look the same to my eye EXCEPT the Mievici , which looks like a carbone bike with lugs except its a pitched Top Tube bike . Too much carbone for me on the market today .

ps: why did they not use a carbone stem for this photo shoot and the fork has got to go :banana:

[pdxmech13]

Ugliest bike ever!

[TimD]

All Carbone bikes are starting to look the same to my eye EXCEPT the Mievici , which looks like a carbone bike with lugs except its a pitched Top Tube bike .



Smiley, with all due respect, check out http://www.parleecycles.com/products.htm

Could Parlee sculpt their lugs? Dunno.

Note I'm not affiliated with this builder in any way, nor do I own any of their producs. However, the Z1 with Reynolds carbon wheels and full Campy Record I saw last year was pure sex.

TimD

[BumbleBeeDave]

. . . aesthetic considerations, I'm wondering how they would make a frame like this "custom" without running into the financial bugaboo of having to have a separate mold made for every possible size of a bike that looks to be of monocoque construction. I can see that the fat rings on the head tube might be so thay would have the latitude to machine the junction at variable angles, but how would they achieve the bending at the junctions to the seat tube?

Can we be certain that this is truly "custom?"

BBDave

[Sandy]

I was wondering about the custom aspect also.


Sandy

[dbrk]

It's no secret that I think lugged steel is incomparably more beautiful and just as worthy in ride performance as any carbon bike, so my bias is unambigous. But I think it's pretty darn interesting that as ugly as this Seven is, the willingness on this Forum to say, "Dang, that's ugly...the paint, the headtube, the whatever..." is interestingly candid when the Meivici _in comparison_ is getting away with a lot more "wait and see," "gee, it's okay..."

Okay, I'll be candid. I think the example we've seen of the Meivici is not as ugly as this Seven but the paint or decaling on the Serotta does nothing for me---it's to _my unstudied eye_ ugly--- the sloper thing is ugly, and there's way less to keep my attention looking at carbon than any lugged steel bike. Because we are genteel and reasonably polite here on Serotta's own Forum, we might be "tough" on the Meivici but we aren't doing anything like what we seem perfectly willing to do to the Seven (even if the Seven is uglier). In short, we rip into Seven but we are merely tough on Meivici--- at least for the most part, no?

So it goes, I've no interest in either bike for myself but as a trend in the cycling industry it will be like minting money, black gold, Texas tea...Ol'Jed will be a millionaire...whoever Jed is...or maybe not, there's not THAT much money to made even in overpriced bikes.

dbrk

[Ahneida Ride]

another Douglas Brooks .... It may be fast .. It may be comfortable.
Heck.... May be the best bike ever.

But it is Fugly ...... I can't ride a Fugly bike ....

[JohnS]

The Meivici looks normal compared to the Seven. I think that's why we've been "gentler" on it. It looks like a sloped-tube cf bike. The Seven has the weird HT, aero ST and everything. I don't think us being on the Serotta forum has anything to do with it. personally, when I saw the Meivici, I thought "yawn, boring". When I saw the Seven, I gagged.

[Sandy]

The Meivici or the Seven or the Colnago C-50 or Trek Madone or Specialized Tarmac or.... The look of a bike is not important compared to how it rides.

Looking so fine,

Sandy

[dbrk]

The look of a bike is not important compared to how it rides.
Sandy

Sandy knows I respect and honor his opinions. This is just one with which I cannot bring myself into much of any agreement. Sure, an ugly bike may ride great but a beautiful bike will certainly ride better. Beauty may be in the eye of the beholder and thank goodness it is. I am delighted that people don't have all the same tastes or mine, nor would I ever endorse conformity, compliance, or any other notion that reduces diversity and options. I _want_ differences, including of opinion (and am far more frightened and disenchanted by any suggestion that we should hold the same views, be they about bikes or anything else!) But I cannot see any reason to separate the ride as such from the look of the bike or its design aesthetics. Is there any reason why we should compromise one for the other? Is there any reason why we think that form should suffer for function?

I would agree that the Seven is uglier than the Meivici, to my eye. But I'm not sure I think either of them had/needs to be/or should suffer being ugly just becase a certain ride was sought. It's a Buckminster Fuller sort of thing: beauty does not come at the expense of function.

dbrk

[BumbleBeeDave]

. . . that people were (are?) complaining about the Meivici because it doesn't look different enough and about this Seven because it looks TOO different. Can anyone offer an example of the middle ground for a carbon bike, where it looks diff but not TOO? . . .

BBDave

[Sandy]

The Meivici looks normal compared to the Seven. I think that's why we've been "gentler" on it. It looks like a sloped-tube cf bike. The Seven has the weird HT, aero ST and everything. I don't think us being on the Serotta forum has anything to do with it. personally, when I saw the Meivici, I thought "yawn, boring". When I saw the Seven, I gagged.

So how do you think I felt when I first met Kevan?? :)


:) Still Sick Sandy :)

[dirtdigger88]

. . . Can anyone offer an example of the middle ground for a carbon bike, where it looks diff but not TOO? . . .

BBDave

sure. . . here (http://forums.thepaceline.net/showthread.php?t=10437)

Jason

[JohnS]

. . . that people were (are?) complaining about the Meivici because it doesn't look different enough and about this Seven because it looks TOO different. Can anyone offer an example of the middle ground for a carbon bike, where it looks diff but not TOO? . . .

BBDave
I think with the Meivici, people expected something different looking FOR THE MONEY. If it was $4000, people would've said it was fine.

[JohnS]

So how do you think I felt when I first met Kevan?? :)


:) Still Sick Sandy :)
That's a personal matter between the two of you. :)

[RichMc]

. . . that people were (are?) complaining about the Meivici because it doesn't look different enough and about this Seven because it looks TOO different. Can anyone offer an example of the middle ground for a carbon bike, where it looks diff but not TOO? . . .

BBDave

Sure.

How about the Merckx AXM?

Do you think that would qualify?

[Sandy]

First, Mira the Wonder Hound and Darby the Wonder Dog are the best examples of form and function simultaneously. But then, we humans did not produce either.

Secondly, I know that even if a bike rides wonderfully well, you would never buy it without it being aesthetically pleasing. It would be imperative to have a balanced and appealing look. You would say why give up either, when you can have both simultaneously (in a lugged steel bike, for example). I truly understand that logic and it is hardly debatable. It makes sense. But if I found a bike that I really enjoyed riding better than any other that I had tried, I would buy it based upon function alone. I would try to make the form look as aesthetically appealing as possible. But it would not be paramount in making my decision.

So Supersonic Speedy

So Scintillating Sexy

Sandy

[split]

If that is a TT frame, personally, I think the Seven is cooler than the CXII frame.

[Serotta_James]

just more pictures.

[split]

just more pictures.

I have a comment: Holy crap, that is beautiful. Hmmm, small car or the Meivici? I choose the bike.

[Johny]

just more pictures.

It looks great...with Campy. :)

[Argos]

James, start a new thread with that. That is GEORGOUS!

[Sandy]

I agree with Argos. MUCH more appealing than the other pictures of the Meivici. Start a thread showing that bike. Make the picture larger. Bet you would receive a lot of compliments on the bike's appearance.

Sandy

[Dr. Doofus]

that seven is booty

and not like a honey with a big set a burgers and tight pants*

the serotta is fine

like lohan in a mesh shirt

(buts its still plastic)







*who the hell thought that jessica simpson, who is still struggling with her impersonation of a talent as her bony butt struggles with an impersonation of an ***, should wear daisy dukes for thirty minutes of screen time?

[jdoiv]

What does it weigh built up like that? If it were insanely light, I may fork over that kind of cash... after I put the two little ones through college...
:)

[Too Tall]

Not ugly. Thanks James.
I'm pretty certain I can break it, PM me for a shipping address ;) Pineapple.

Elvis has left the sandbox.

[Climb01742]

there are frames we love for how they look. there are frames we love for how they ride. if we're lucky, the two overlap. but personally, if a frame rode brilliantly for me, i could care less how it looked. i've been riding my time vxrs a lot this week...to my eye, it isn't beautiful, it isn't ugly...it just rides freaking brilliantly. at the end of the day, isn't that what a bike is for?

[Marco]

i've been riding my time vxrs a lot this week...to my eye, it isn't beautiful, it isn't ugly...it just rides freaking brilliantly.

What Climb said for my VXR also.........

[ergott]

Looks fast??

I guarantee that that bike NEVER saw a wind tunnel. The front cluster looks like $HIT. No internal routing, just LOOK at how they mount the front brake on a cheap looking extension on the fork just to get it to work. The transition to the fork is horrible. The only nice things I can sya about this picture is, nice wheels and nice groupo.

This bike is a waste. Someone drew it on paper and never thought about real world performance. They probably thought it looked fast and unique. Wow, good for them.

If you handed me that bike for free I'd sell it on ebay immediatly! Of course, I'll keep the parts! If I want a REALLY aero bike, I get a Cervelo or Trek which both have ACTUALLY been to a wind tunnel!!!

[dbrk]

there are frames we love for how they look. there are frames we love for how they ride. if we're lucky, the two overlap. but personally, if a frame rode brilliantly for me, i could care less how it looked. i've been riding my time vxrs a lot this week...to my eye, it isn't beautiful, it isn't ugly...it just rides freaking brilliantly. at the end of the day, isn't that what a bike is for?


Uhhh...no.
A bike is for whatever you want it to be because a bike unridden is still a bike and it can still bring the owner whatever he or she wants from it. Never reduce beauty to function...that's a policy that makes the world mundane.

dbrk

[Climb01742]

Uhhh...no.
A bike is for whatever you want it to be because a bike unridden is still a bike and it can still bring the owner whatever he or she wants from it. Never reduce beauty to function...that's a policy that makes the world mundane.

dbrk

i don't believe i did reduce it to that. each rider has their own values. part of believing in yours is letting others believe in theirs. interesting question, if an unridden bike is still a bike, is an uneaten meal still a meal?

interesting, too, that carbon does not bring out your generous nature, douglas. but instead your pedant's hammer.

[JohnS]

Uhhh...no.
A bike is for whatever you want it to be because a bike unridden is still a bike and it can still bring the owner whatever he or she wants from it. Never reduce beauty to function...that's a policy that makes the world mundane.

dbrk
A bike unridden is a bunch of metal tubes joined together in one of several ways. It is only 2% of its potential. The most aesthetically beautiful bike in the world is useless if it can't handle the road, but you'll never know that until it is ridden.

[dbrk]

i don't believe i did reduce it to that. each rider has their own values. part of believing in yours is letting others believe in theirs. interesting question, if an unridden bike is still a bike, is an uneaten meal still a meal?

interesting, too, that carbon does not bring out your generous nature, douglas. but instead your pedant's hammer.


Nothing in my comments mentioned the material of the frame as being at issue. I was merely observing that a bike is still a bike whether or not it is ridden and however it brings it's owner pleasure doesn't make it less a bicycle. It's not a bunch of tubes, it's a bike. We've recently had this "debate" and JohnS has expressed, perhaps more vociferously, the view that I thought you, Climbpal, made quite clear at the conculsion of your post, viz., that a bike is for riding before any other consideration. Well, as I see it, that depends on the owner and what he or she wants from the bike.

I actually don't own any bikes that I don't ride but it would matter less to me if I did or if others chose not to. A bike is no less a bike for being an object someone loves for whatever reason. My point was as simple as that. I confess to pedantry but I come by it honestly as a peril of my profession. Your comment seemed clear enough but I suppose I came across testy when, well, I meant no such spirit of contradiction, only an alternative view.

I'll go one further. I'm delighted some bikes aren't ridden anymore or never were. It gives us examples of the craft that speak to history in ways that reveal as much by their not having been used than if they had.

dbrk

[Brian Smith]

Looks fast??

I guarantee that that bike NEVER saw a wind tunnel. The front cluster looks like $HIT. No internal routing, just LOOK at how they mount the front brake on a cheap looking extension on the fork just to get it to work. The transition to the fork is horrible. The only nice things I can sya about this picture is, nice wheels and nice groupo.

This bike is a waste. Someone drew it on paper and never thought about real world performance. They probably thought it looked fast and unique. Wow, good for them.

If you handed me that bike for free I'd sell it on ebay immediatly! Of course, I'll keep the parts! If I want a REALLY aero bike, I get a Cervelo or Trek which both have ACTUALLY been to a wind tunnel!!!


I've never seen a quantification of how much drag some particular frame/bike/rider had both with and without "internal" cables.
Meanwhile, I do recall seeing a quantification of the drag of a bike with and without a rider.
Have riders now become so aerodynamic that the drag of the frame is now a crucial tuning parameter?
I doubt it.
It certainly hasn't been released as an "aero bike," whatever that is.

[ergott]

I've never seen a quantification of how much drag some particular frame/bike/rider had both with and without "internal" cables.
Meanwhile, I do recall seeing a quantification of the drag of a bike with and without a rider.
Have riders now become so aerodynamic that the drag of the frame is now a crucial tuning parameter?
I doubt it.
It certainly hasn't been released as an "aero bike," whatever that is.


People buy Seven/Serotta/Calfee and the like for custom frames with excellent craftsmanship. Their forms are very functional. You say that this bike wasn't released as an "aero bike". Can you, or anybody for that matter, explain why it looks like it does? What function is there in the shape of that bike?

If this bike is designed that way to "look good" then it failed in my opinion. If the bike was designed that way to be more aerodynamic, I have a strong feeling that it failed at that too. Sure, I can't tell what the drag coefficient of this bike is just by looking so I could be wrong, but I bet I'm not.
If you look at bikes that have been wind tunnel tested (with and without riders), there are some common features. The Cervelo, Trek, Phonak bike are some that I know of. They have wing profiled tubing, internal cable routing and a seattube that act as a fairing for the rear wheel. One thing about Lance was his obsession over details. This has shown in Treks advancement of their product line. I highly doubt that the details on his time trial bike were gimmicks.

While it is true that the frame is a much smaller part of the drag when considering a rider, it does not mean that everyone has to ignore it. If someone wants a bike that is more aerodynamic they have valid reasons to do so just as they do for buying more aerodynamic wheels. It is one part of an overall package.

[Climb01742]

Nothing in my comments mentioned the material of the frame as being at issue. I was merely observing that a bike is still a bike whether or not it is ridden and however it brings it's owner pleasure doesn't make it less a bicycle. It's not a bunch of tubes, it's a bike. We've recently had this "debate" and JohnS has expressed, perhaps more vociferously, the view that I thought you, Climbpal, made quite clear at the conculsion of your post, viz., that a bike is for riding before any other consideration. Well, as I see it, that depends on the owner and what he or she wants from the bike.

I actually don't own any bikes that I don't ride but it would matter less to me if I did or if others chose not to. A bike is no less a bike for being an object someone loves for whatever reason. My point was as simple as that. I confess to pedantry but I come by it honestly as a peril of my profession. Your comment seemed clear enough but I suppose I came across testy when, well, I meant no such spirit of contradiction, only an alternative view.

I'll go one further. I'm delighted some bikes aren't ridden anymore or never were. It gives us examples of the craft that speak to history in ways that reveal as much by their not having been used than if they had.

dbrk

douglas, what i tried to balance in my post -- and perhaps did not do well -- is this: there are many things to admire in a bike. and each rider has his or her own set of things they care about. that is as it should be. ultimately, i suppose, a bike is about giving joy, and however someone finds joy in a bike, that is all to the good. but what i do find a bit perplexing sometimes is the great emphasis often expressed here on how a bike looks. yes, looks matter; and yes to some they matter a great deal. but for me personally, how a bike performs ultimately matters more. this is my personal set of values, and only that. no more, no less valid than anyone else's. it would be great if all bikes could be visually pleasing and ride wonderfully. but those two don't always co-exist, at least not in everyone's eye. maybe it is my limitation or predisposition, but i see bikes as tools, first and foremost, and find their greatest beauty in how well they achieve the ride the builder set out to achieve. again, that is one yardstick among many, no better, no worse. for example, by almost every measure, this frame is "ugly", but for what the builder set out to do, i find beauty, ingenuity, and an oddball charm in its singleness of purpose. sometimes beauty is christopher wren, sometimes it's walter gropius. viva la difference.

http://weightweenies.starbike.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=8193&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0&sid=2a99489ce8aa8b4841807dba37d47883

[shoe]

absolutely - to each their own when it comes to bikes. but my god what if your friends saw you riding it. the seven that is. what would be kinda cool though is if you dressed up in a full darth vader costume with a super long cape and just blew by everyone on there slow round tubed bikes. beware of the dark side it is strong. the function in design is cool i think it just needs some chrome lugs perhaps.

[davids]

...Maybe you thought a different paint job would improve its appearance.

Wrong:

http://www.velonews.com/images/report/8819.12514.f.jpg

That ...perplexing... headtube:

http://www.velonews.com/images/report/8819.12515.f.jpg

[Argos]

Maybe next time they should adjust the front bake pads on a Show bike before displaying it.

[oldguy00]

Looks fast??

I guarantee that that bike NEVER saw a wind tunnel. The front cluster looks like $HIT. No internal routing, just LOOK at how they mount the front brake on a cheap looking extension on the fork just to get it to work. The transition to the fork is horrible. The only nice things I can sya about this picture is, nice wheels and nice groupo.

This bike is a waste. Someone drew it on paper and never thought about real world performance. They probably thought it looked fast and unique. Wow, good for them.

If you handed me that bike for free I'd sell it on ebay immediatly! Of course, I'll keep the parts! If I want a REALLY aero bike, I get a Cervelo or Trek which both have ACTUALLY been to a wind tunnel!!!

Would you say that the Cervelo R2.5 is garbage as well? Both the R2.5 and the Mevici look very similar in shape, style, cable routing, etc.

[BumbleBeeDave]

. . . the rest of the bike with a less brassy paint job, but that head tube has all the subtlety and grace of a battleship's bow no matter what color it's painted.

Of course, given the probable price, I guess I won't have to worry about it anyway. :rolleyes:

BBDave

[lnomalley]

Would you say that the Cervelo R2.5 is garbage as well? Both the R2.5 and the Mevici look very similar in shape, style, cable routing, etc.

i love it when i see y'all saying great things about the r2.5 when the guys that were paid to ride it hated it. they wanted to ride the aluminum rigs but weren't allowed. as soon as sciandri got off the team he went right for his principia and was very open about his disgust with the r2.5... look at how much stiffer there new rig is and you can see that they werent happy with it....

i know guys that love it too.. but not the guys that were paid to ride it. and what is this way of thinking.. that because something looks similar that it is similar..thats stupid. one bike comes in stock sizes with the lamest justification i have ever seen for seat tube angle.... and the other is custom and tuneable to the nth degree. that they both have carbonlugs is true.. so what?

carbon bikes exist because you want them....

[csb]

Never reduce beauty to function...that's a policy that makes the world mundane.
dbrk

in agreement, one word: women

[bostondrunk]

i love it when i see y'all saying great things about the r2.5 when the guys that were paid to ride it hated it. they wanted to ride the aluminum rigs but weren't allowed. as soon as sciandri got off the team he went right for his principia and was very open about his disgust with the r2.5... look at how much stiffer there new rig is and you can see that they werent happy with it....

i know guys that love it too.. but not the guys that were paid to ride it. and what is this way of thinking.. that because something looks similar that it is similar..thats stupid. one bike comes in stock sizes with the lamest justification i have ever seen for seat tube angle.... and the other is custom and tuneable to the nth degree. that they both have carbonlugs is true.. so what?

carbon bikes exist because you want them....

1. I think you are pretty much full of ****, and you don't know what you are talking about.
2. Take a pill.

[Serotta PETE]

:beer: :beer: 1. I think you are pretty much full of ****, and you don't know what you are talking about.
2. Take a pill.


Lets all go have a beer or two or three and discuss something else

[ergott]

Would you say that the Cervelo R2.5 is garbage as well? Both the R2.5 and the Mevici look very similar in shape, style, cable routing, etc.

If you follow the thread you will see that I'm talking about the new Seven, not the Meivici.

[vaxn8r]

....carbon bikes exist because you want them....
Does that apply to carbon wheels too?

[Argos]

....carbon bikes exist because you want them....


I thought that this was the reasons planes flew, instead of falling from the sky?

[shaq-d]

all this makes me think the trek 5200 is still one of the best carbon bikes out there...if not the.

sd

[lnomalley]

1. I think you are pretty much full of ****, and you don't know what you are talking about.
2. Take a pill.


well.. you are entitled to that opinion... and i welcome it.
i talked to sciandri about it a few weeks afer he left csc over coffee and then again on a nice ride up the coast he was the most forthright i'd ever heard any d1 rider about his dislike of that frame.. his opinion belongs entirely to him and is subjective. i even added that i know riders that love the frame...and i think making every different sized bike with the same seat tube angle is a little conceptually weak... and again, i think that the assumption that because two things look the same somehow translates to them performoing the same is silly. if you wouldnt mind.. show me specifically why any of this sounds off to you? i love the chance to learn from any mistakes i might be making and welcome your enlightenment. what exactly am i writing that you contest?

i am referring to a few comments in the last month comparing the cervelo to the serotta....this is clearly evoking something passionate enough in you that you are making judgements about me... you are welcome to come ride with me any time and talk about it.....

[The Spider]

Bringing the thread back to original banter (how did we end up talking about Cervelo R2.5?....someone mentioned aero (ergott) testing (and I'm sure he wasn't thinking R2.5 when he made that comment, more P3/soloist...next thing you know the mud's flying!)

Seven = ugly

Obviously not an "TT" or "Aero" bike...you don't set the thing up with a fork like that, Zipp 303 and Zero Gravity for TT. Could be designed to make Climbo change his find about the apperence of his Time (I think they look great Climbo!...well they look good as Boonen hammers them).

I agree that it looks like a 'melted' version of a Cervelo (oh boy, here we go!) Soloist Carbon.

a bike is a bike is a bike unless it's not ridden! Well hypothetically if you lost the ability to ride (and I pray that never happens to ANYONE) would you get rid of the bikes because seeing them would increase the frustration and pain or would you be able to still receive pleasure from just looking at them?

[bostondrunk]

well.. you are entitled to that opinion... and i welcome it.
i talked to sciandri about it a few weeks afer he left csc over coffee and then again on a nice ride up the coast he was the most forthright i'd ever heard any d1 rider about his dislike of that frame.. his opinion belongs entirely to him and is subjective. i even added that i know riders that love the frame...and i think making every different sized bike with the same seat tube angle is a little conceptually weak... and again, i think that the assumption that because two things look the same somehow translates to them performoing the same is silly. if you wouldnt mind.. show me specifically why any of this sounds off to you? i love the chance to learn from any mistakes i might be making and welcome your enlightenment. what exactly am i writing that you contest?

i am referring to a few comments in the last month comparing the cervelo to the serotta....this is clearly evoking something passionate enough in you that you are making judgements about me... you are welcome to come ride with me any time and talk about it.....

Sorry, knee jerk reaction. I was refering more to the fact about how people on here act as if they know how the entire pro peleton feels about their equipment. Also, what is so strange about a 73 seat angle?

[lnomalley]

Sorry, knee jerk reaction. I was refering more to the fact about how people on here act as if they know how the entire pro peleton feels about their equipment. Also, what is so strange about a 73 seat angle?


nothing is strange about a 73 degree seat angle.. it's pretty common.. just not on every size bike. generally smaller guys need steeper seat angles to make a bike fit and taller guys need slacker. . to fit on their geometry i'd have to put their seat post on backwards (which in their venacular is really that the saetpost is supposed to be that way because its 'adjustable').. so yes i then get the 'correct' angle... but .. well look at cannondale... look how the seat tube angle is different in various sizes.... its weak to see cervelo justify the rationale that 73 is the best way to size a frame.... when it isnt.

let's say that you are 6'2" and i am 5'7".. we go and buy the same suit and it can be tailored.. you get it in large and i buy small... the various parts of the suit are scaled to ft you except that the inseam of the pant is exactly the same on both our suits (say 36 inches). its arbitrary.. the 73 degrees works the guys that are 5'10".. a set back seat post covers the taler ones.... but if you are shorter you are supposed to roll up your pants and pretend they ft


where i live.. there are all kinds of pros training and living..so if you are out there you end up riding with them.... its not a big deal so long as you dont crash them out....or perv on them.

[dbrk]

Re: Cervelo's designs.

I too cannot fathom how a 73d sta and the rest of the small frames can ride properly. I don't think I'd have a problem on a 60cm but when you look at anything under 55cm you are also going to have very serious TCO issues. Not a little peril of bumping your toe on a parking lot turn, more like a mistake that anyone could easily make that would cause allll sorts of problems. I spend way too much time with pictures, designs, and the math of bicycles but I also waste my time actually _trying_ things because, well, the numbers may or may not tell the story (for example, the compatibility issues on cassettes are not a math problem because experience tells you otherwise). I've spun about on a small Cervelo and no matter that it didn't fit me, I wouldn't put anyone on such a bike, no way. I'm not surprised that the smaller frames cause consternation or worse.

dbrk

[Ti Designs]

Sorry, knee jerk reaction. I was refering more to the fact about how people on here act as if they know how the entire pro peleton feels about their equipment.

Maybe the whole pro peleton goes to see the same shrink. Rider: Doctor, my bike is all wrong for me, it's got a 73 degree seat angle and they make me ride it. Shrink: And how do you feel about that? Maybe that shrink is on the Serotta forum. So maybe one of us does know how the entire pro peleton feels about their equipment. It could happen...

[cs124]

Re: Cervelo's designs...

... I'm not surprised that the smaller frames cause consternation or worse.

dbrk

a problem one soon gets used to ... kinda like a 7 footer bumping his head on a door frame, soon learns to stoop as he walks through ... the short ar5e rider with the TCO frame tumbles once or twice but soon learns the foot/wheel/lean relationship that results in staying upright in a low speed turn

all my road bikes have TCO to a greater or lesser degree ... i'd prefer that they didn't ... but i'd also prefer to be 5'10"

[Kirk Pacenti]

Maybe the whole pro peleton goes to see the same shrink. Rider: Doctor, my bike is all wrong for me, it's got a 73 degree seat angle and they make me ride it. Shrink: And how do you feel about that? Maybe that shrink is on the Serotta forum. So maybe one of us does know how the entire pro peleton feels about their equipment. It could happen...

Dave,

How do you suppose Liberty felt last year when the whole team had to ride the SAME size bike!? No wonder these guys are using 150mm stems!

[Russell]

...I'm delighted some bikes aren't ridden anymore or never were. It gives us examples of the craft that speak to history in ways that reveal as much by their not having been used than if they had.

dbrk

My mind has just been blown.