Serotta really?

[bjf]

I'm skeptical about this one:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Serotta-Meivici-AE/142651756463?hash=item2136b50faf:g:s3cAAOSwLUpaVjl p

Ben?

[Cicli]

Probably his long lost cousin. Hong Fu Serotta.

Edit, may be real but its ugly as hell.

[cmbicycles]

Serotta did make some aero carbon frames... no idea on how to tell if it's a legit vs fake if that is what you are asking.

Here is a listing from Rustylion (former serotta ceo ) sharing some info about his ae he was selling
https://forums.thepaceline.net/showthread.php?t=161639

[Ken Robb]

Serotta did make some aero carbon frames... no idea on how to tell if it's a legit vs fake if that is what you are asking.
Yeah, that was a surprise for me too. There is a similar looking Serotta that is also for sale on-line now.

[Bruce K]

Sure looks like a Meivici AE.

Not many were made. They were heavy and I don't remember many ride reports but you could search the forum....

BK

[Cicli]

Wait, it that ths same frame as that ugly wood painted thing?

[54ny77]

yes, that appears to be a prime example of the butt ugly ae model. :)

(although the one with a fake wood paint job looks awesome. :banana: )

[ergott]

https://bikewar.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/serotta-_sermeivici_ae_290_09_z.jpg

[deechee]

Geez for 100$ it's a steal.

[Bruce K]

My size, too

But was never an AE fan

BK

[Gpmrntz]

I'm skeptical about this one:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Serotta-Meivici-AE/142651756463?hash=item2136b50faf:g:s3cAAOSwLUpaVjl p

Ben?

I wouldn't call myself an expert, but I know my way around Serottas...I don't ever recall this bike (model)...lots of reasons to be skeptical, not least the internal routing, as I know for a fact that Ben is not a fan at all. I don't believe any of his new SDS bikes have internal routing.

Could be legit....but be wary. Very.

[bmeryman]

I don't know how many were actually sold, but the Meivici AE was definitely a real model.

[happycampyer]

That's definitely a MeiVici AE. The wood-grain painted one is apparently for sale, too:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Serotta-Meivici-AE-Woody-w-showstopper-PPG-paint-54-cm-new/173082262003?_trkparms=aid%3D222007%26algo%3DSIM.M BE%26ao%3D2%26asc%3D47301%26meid%3D815fd1c671c5463 6a17714409595135e%26pid%3D100005%26rk%3D4%26rkt%3D 6%26mehot%3Dpp%26sd%3D142651756463&_trksid=p2047675.c100005.m1851

[54ny77]

Ummm......uhhhh.... :rolleyes:

That's an AE. Serotta made 'em indeed. A friend had one in NYC, and while it was geared to be a TT/Tri rig (as the pic above indicates), some guys set 'em up for road as well (which was the case of the one I'm referring to). They were VERY expensive. I saw a few now & then coming out of Signature Cycles in the city at the time.

I wouldn't call myself an expert, but I know my way around Serottas...I don't ever recall this bike (model)...lots of reasons to be skeptical, not least the internal routing, as I know for a fact that Ben is not a fan at all. I don't believe any of his new SDS bikes have internal routing.

Could be legit....but be wary. Very.

[rwsaunders]

It's real..the fellow that's selling the "woody" version is real too.

[Brian Smith]

Hi folks,

Because there was not a large base of information released and circulated about the Serotta AE model, I think I can help with a bit of its history and some useful knowledge for prospective purchasers. This model was conceived before customized aero carbon frames were available at retail dealerships, and required a staggering array of custom molds in order to produce the necessary parts to be combined in the ways needed to produce frames among the range of rider fitments possible. In reality, the full gamut of necessary molds was never fully completed, and in many cases the order in which the mold making was undertaken matched the initial order requiring said molded part one-for-one. Layup schedule of the parts, and Mike Lopez will know this better than I know it, initially favored rigidity over "lightness," and although many of these frames are fairly portly, one could reasonably expect them to not ride in as flexible a fashion as some of their tube shapes might lead one to suspect.

The fork uses a 1.5 - 1.25 tapered steerer and was notably stable under hard braking - I found it to be more confidence-inspiring when ridden deep into corners under braking than the F3/S3, for the same fork weight. With a very minor aesthetic change to the dropouts it became the fork later used for the Pronto model.

All of the titanium and aluminium parts for these frames were made in Saratoga, while the carbon parts were made in Poway. The bonding of the frames and forks was performed in Poway, and the bonding of the seat masts was performed in Saratoga. These were some of the most time-consuming products the company made in the last 5 years of operation. One irony of this situation is that the development pace and the acceptance of dealer orders for this model were accelerated in part due to the extant preconceived perception that the titanium aero-tubed models consuming a lot of production time. It's not unfair to say that producing these carbon aero models (there was an HSG stock-geometry variant as well) was a drag applied to the company's other, more matured products.

These framesets were so individually-tailored that even a change in the intended saddle for the build before the order was completed and shipped could result in substantially more additional production time. This fact is noteworthy not only for the history of the model, but as an important consideration for the prospective buyer of a used AE. Here's why:
The included seat masts for the AE had a limited up/down adjustment range. The later-built models generally did a better job achieving flexibility in adjustment range, but the stated range of adjustment of saddle heights for these carbon aero models was 3 cm - 1 1/2 cm up and 1 1/2 cm down. They were painted in a manner such that a portion of the frame that slid inside the seat mast was left unpainted. Locating the bottom of the seat mast's aluminium collar 1 1/2 cm above the taped-off paint line achieves the design seat rail height for an AE. Exceeding 3 cm above the taped-off paint line will yield a less-securely fastened seat mast and a damaged seat mast collar. It therefore becomes pretty important, when evaluating whether one of these models will fit a rider (and saddle, crank, pedal, shoe/cleat thickness, etc) that it wasn't originally designed to fit, to know the bottom bracket to saddle rail distance of the used frame in question. The seat masts were a proprietary part, were made only in-house, and were custom, such that even a seat mast from another AE is not entirely likely to replace the original.

Because there seemed to be a bit of confusion and interest in the pair currently listed on ebay, I thought that I'd share a bit of that knowledge with whomever it may be of use. I'd opine, after reviewing both listings, that the example listed as located in Singapore looks to be both legit and of later production date, of the preferable period. The woodgrain-painted version, however, was created from a pre-production piece of scrap, and I wouldn't recommend it being used by a rider even on a stationary trainer where the risk of injury due to failure would be managed low, let alone used by a rider on the road. <shudder> It's a phenomenal piece of paintwork and an interesting display piece, but it has no value, in my estimation, for use as the basis for a bicycle meant to be ridden.

I hope that the above information is helpful here. I wouldn't want anybody to be injured while trying to ride the scrap piece, nor would I want anybody to buy the ridable example without the knowledge that the design seat rail height is an important purchase consideration. I'm happy to assist with general information about these Serotta models and others, but I don't have sizing information available for them.

[happycampyer]

Thanks for the info, Brian—it’s always great to hear from you!

[Black Dog]

Hi folks,

Because there was not a large base of information released and circulated about the Serotta AE model, I think I can help with a bit of its history and some useful knowledge for prospective purchasers. This model was conceived before customized aero carbon frames were available at retail dealerships, and required a staggering array of custom molds in order to produce the necessary parts to be combined in the ways needed to produce frames among the range of rider fitments possible. In reality, the full gamut of necessary molds was never fully completed, and in many cases the order in which the mold making was undertaken matched the initial order requiring said molded part one-for-one. Layup schedule of the parts, and Mike Lopez will know this better than I know it, initially favored rigidity over "lightness," and although many of these frames are fairly portly, one could reasonably expect them to not ride in as flexible a fashion as some of their tube shapes might lead one to suspect.

The fork uses a 1.5 - 1.25 tapered steerer and was notably stable under hard braking - I found it to be more confidence-inspiring when ridden deep into corners under braking than the F3/S3, for the same fork weight. With a very minor aesthetic change to the dropouts it became the fork later used for the Pronto model.

All of the titanium and aluminium parts for these frames were made in Saratoga, while the carbon parts were made in Poway. The bonding of the frames and forks was performed in Poway, and the bonding of the seat masts was performed in Saratoga. These were some of the most time-consuming products the company made in the last 5 years of operation. One irony of this situation is that the development pace and the acceptance of dealer orders for this model were accelerated in part due to the extant preconceived perception that the titanium aero-tubed models consuming a lot of production time. It's not unfair to say that producing these carbon aero models (there was an HSG stock-geometry variant as well) was a drag applied to the company's other, more matured products.

These framesets were so individually-tailored that even a change in the intended saddle for the build before the order was completed and shipped could result in substantially more additional production time. This fact is noteworthy not only for the history of the model, but as an important consideration for the prospective buyer of a used AE. Here's why:
The included seat masts for the AE had a limited up/down adjustment range. The later-built models generally did a better job achieving flexibility in adjustment range, but the stated range of adjustment of saddle heights for these carbon aero models was 3 cm - 1 1/2 cm up and 1 1/2 cm down. They were painted in a manner such that a portion of the frame that slid inside the seat mast was left unpainted. Locating the bottom of the seat mast's aluminium collar 1 1/2 cm above the taped-off paint line achieves the design seat rail height for an AE. Exceeding 3 cm above the taped-off paint line will yield a less-securely fastened seat mast and a damaged seat mast collar. It therefore becomes pretty important, when evaluating whether one of these models will fit a rider (and saddle, crank, pedal, shoe/cleat thickness, etc) that it wasn't originally designed to fit, to know the bottom bracket to saddle rail distance of the used frame in question. The seat masts were a proprietary part, were made only in-house, and were custom, such that even a seat mast from another AE is not entirely likely to replace the original.

Because there seemed to be a bit of confusion and interest in the pair currently listed on ebay, I thought that I'd share a bit of that knowledge with whomever it may be of use. I'd opine, after reviewing both listings, that the example listed as located in Singapore looks to be both legit and of later production date, of the preferable period. The woodgrain-painted version, however, was created from a pre-production piece of scrap, and I wouldn't recommend it being used by a rider even on a stationary trainer where the risk of injury due to failure would be managed low, let alone used by a rider on the road. <shudder> It's a phenomenal piece of paintwork and an interesting display piece, but it has no value, in my estimation, for use as the basis for a bicycle meant to be ridden.

I hope that the above information is helpful here. I wouldn't want anybody to be injured while trying to ride the scrap piece, nor would I want anybody to buy the ridable example without the knowledge that the design seat rail height is an important purchase consideration. I'm happy to assist with general information about these Serotta models and others, but I don't have sizing information available for them.

Thanks for the insight. Really great back story. The details about the woodgrain AE is beyond helpful to anyone that might be thinking of buying that. Wow.

Amazing to hear stories about Serotta about the level of detail and effort that went into the bikes, even if it was often a fiscal black hole to do so at times.

[William]

Agree!

Brian, thank you for sharing your knowledge and expertise on these models gleaned from your first hand experience working at Serotta.






William