Cervelo

[mike p]

What's your experience with cervelo R3 or soloist? In my town they aren't real common. I think we have about 5 or 6 that show up at our tues. nite race's and every one of them has broken! The last one broke half way down the seat tube! Most have broke around the BB. I was really interested in an R3 but now I'm thinking twice. Everyone that broke got great customer service from cervelo, but still a hassle to strip down and ship out. Whats your experience?

Mike

[DarrenCT]

i've never owned one however the downtube seems very "breakable".

im sure it is more durable than we would think...

-d

[cadence90]

Interesting.

I just read this. http://weightweenies.starbike.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=33215

I've read of similar problems before.
I guess if it were me, I would just look elsewhere at this point.

[Jack Brunk]

My SLC superlight is the best all around frame I've ridden to date. In all aspects it's faster than than any frame I've ridden. Give one a try, then make up your mind. The new R3Sl looks killer.

[mike p]

Jack,
I agree they look great and the ones I've hopped on for a test ride rode great. I just haven't seen one make through a full season of racing yet.

Mike

[FlaRider]

My next TT bike will be a Cervelo P3C. Cervelo makes great bikes.

[Z3c]

Hello,

I have ridden the SLC and the R3 a fair amount, with the same Zipp wheelset(Jack I totally agree with your wheel effect comments!) and I found the R3 to be much more comfortable, totally stiff and smooth as glass. The SLC reminded me of an alu bike in that I felt the road much more. I have not ridden either SL bike. Have not seen any of them break; have seen a few that survived some bad crashes unscathed though. If you look at the reviews on roadbikereview.com, you will see that a lot of folks love these bikes; I think the rare issues tend to get over inflated on all bikes in general.

Scott

[Jack Brunk]

Jack,
I agree they look great and the ones I've hopped on for a test ride rode great. I just haven't seen one make through a full season of racing yet.

Mike
I don't race mine as I don't do crits. Mine is set up for double centuries and more. Every time I ride it I'm still amazed at how fast it feels and the computer shows it's faster also.

[Ti Designs]

My next TT bike will be a Cervelo P3C. Cervelo makes great bikes.

Can I ask why? Lots of people are looking for those frames, and the design has been copied by Orbea with '08 models from Specialized and Trek not far behind. What I've found is the 38cm chainstays with the wheel tucked in behind what could almost be called a seat tube cause a few problems. First, good chainline is restricted to a couple of cogs per chainring. Second, they don't go on trainers - well they do, you just can't ride one without your heels hitting the trainer. Third - and this is the real danger, they are tricky to handle. As far as I know, TT times go up when the back wheel slips out form under you and you wind up sitting on the ground wondering what just happened and where the other half of your shorts are...

[FlaRider]

TiDesigns - I have not ridden one personally but a lot of my friends swear by them. I haven't heard any about any of the problems you reference, which doesn't mean, of course, that your points are not relevant. The Cervelo P3C has achieved cult-like status among time trialers and triathletes. If Fabian Cancellara or Dave Z. didn't like theirs, I'm sure they would have ridden re-badged bikes at the Tour. Just my two cents.

[swoop]

TiDesigns - I have not ridden one personally but a lot of my friends swear by them. I haven't heard any about any of the problems you reference, which doesn't mean, of course, that your points are not relevant. The Cervelo P3C has achieved cult-like status among time trialers and triathletes. If Fabian Cancellara or Dave Z. didn't like theirs, I'm sure they would have ridden re-badged bikes at the Tour. Just my two cents.

this last bit isn't true. those guys have no say on what they ride. the fiasco with dz's shoes is just the tip of the iceberg. same goes for pedals (i've heard it first hand from guys on the team.. from sciandri when he was with them to current guys). the p3's hardly come in a functional range of sizes... and those guys would be great on any bike.

the cervelos ride great. the limiting factors are seat tube angle being the same on all sizes and that if and when there is a warranty issue it can be a long wait to get a replacement because they're often times there are no extras to go around. the finish quality isn't what one would confuse for say.. a Vanilla or Sachs.

few mass manufactured bikes are in the same league as a boutique built bikes in terms of craftsmanship and you should adjust your expectations accordingly... i don't think they pretend to be the same finish quality.

levi's fit on that trek is ungodly looking. fit is everything. most folks in the real world do well to have a tt bike that mimics their postition on their road bike, and i see very few tri riders than can actually ride a bike.
they're out there .. good riders.. but they're not common. and by the time one is at a point where theyr'e getting benefit from a stealthy bike... its often lost to a power robbing position on the bike.




atmo.

[chrisroph]

I picked up a 56 r3 a few months back and have ridden it a bunch. I like it a lot. It is pretty cheap, very light, extremely stiff and comfortable, fits me well (with saddle slammed back and a 13 cm stem), it climbs fine, descends exceptionally well, and corners great. In short, it is a superb racing machine. As for durability, I haven't crashed, dinged or dented it and it hasn't fallen apart. If I do crash it or drop it on a curb and it breaks, what do you expect it only weighs 900gm?

[oldguy00]

I tried one (an R3). Like most production bikes, you can make them fit. But I use a somewhat small size, 54, and with the effective 73 degree seat angle, I had my saddle pushed fairly far forward, and I felt like I had too much of my weight towards the front of the bike.

But otherwise, if it fits you well, I think they are some of the best frames available in the world.

[Andreas]

I tried one (an R3). I had my saddle pushed fairly far forward, and I felt like I had too much of my weight towards the front of the bike.


Not sure this makes sense to me.
Enlighten me, why did you push it forward with a 73 STA and then complain that you had too much weight in front?

Just tryin' to learn...

[mjb266]

I had a 58 cm R3 for a while and it rode well. I know Kahuna has one and loves it also. That being said, I never got over the feeling that the tubing was just too delicate. I felt like leaning the bike against something was asking for it to break. I know that Roubaix was won on it and blah, blah, blah...the thing was freakishily light and I couldn't justify spending that much on a bike and then not racing it for fear of replacement options. I just wanted something more substantial.

[mike p]

To all, sorry if I came off like I was pooh-poohing cervelo. That wasn't my intent at all. I really liked the R3's I rode and was thinking of buying one for next season. My only question is durability. I'm 6'2 and weight 185 and don't want a fragile bike.

"few mass manufactured bikes are in the same league as a boutique built bikes in terms of craftsmanship and you should adjust your expectations accordingly... i don't think they pretend to be the same finish quality."

This is very true, Ones I've seen aren't finished near as nice as many high end carbon frames. But they don't cost near as much either. That dosen't bother me at all. I've raced a ridley sc. the last two seasons and I think stevie wonder tigged up the frame ,but it's quite strong and hasn't let me down. Also the geometry that bothers some works out fine for me.

Swoop said cervelo could be slow with warranty issues. People in my town have had good luck and pretty fast service with replacements. I realize the broken cervelo's I've seen could be a fluke. I've know of only those I race with and the jerks problems. Thats why I asked.

Thanks
Mike

[Climb01742]

My next TT bike will be a Cervelo P3C. Cervelo makes great bikes.

another thought for a TT rig is a walser. i saw one two weeks ago. every one is custom made. you need custom cranks and wheels as walser makes the frames ungodly narrow. to steal a line, a walser isn't a bike, it's a lifestyle. michael rich is apparently walser's human test lab. ain't cheap but lordy it's trick. seems to have a good track record too. and nobody, but nobody else, will show up with one...unless it's jan trying to sneak into a race in fla. ;)

http://www.walser-cycles.ch/

[FlaRider]

another thought for a TT rig is a walser. i saw one two weeks ago. every one is custom made. you need custom cranks and wheels as walser makes the frames ungodly narrow. to steal a line, a walser isn't a bike, it's a lifestyle. michael rich is apparently walser's human test lab. ain't cheap but lordy it's trick. seems to have a good track record too. and nobody, but nobody else, will show up with one...unless it's jan trying to sneak into a race in fla. ;)

http://www.walser-cycles.ch/

Thanks for the link, Climb. Those Walsers are da bomb!

[Kahuna]

Let's face reality. Nobody should think of buying an R3 if longevity is your primary goal. If you want a bike designed to last, buy a ti frame. R3s are sub-900g featherweights. Cervelo didn't design them to be disposable, but to their engineering credit they can take a substantial beating. All I'm saying is that owners should have reasonable expectations. Yes, I'd be upset if a tube cracked on my R3, but I wouldn't be shocked. Now you see how well Cervelo has me trained! They saw me comin' :D

Having said that, I've been trying to break my R3 for over a year and so far I've been unsuccessful (knock on wood). I ride the thang almost every day and oh, how I do love it.

-K

[Dave]

The R3 has thin aluminum bearing seats for the integrated headset's cartridge bearings. These seats are not replaceable and so thin that they couldn't be recut more than once, if worn. The finish on the frame is not as good as other brands in the same price range.

The geometry in the 48 and 51cm sizes is quite strange, with an incredibly short front-center and a small amount of steering trail. Combine that with ultra short chainstays and you've got a bike that's shorter than any other brand on the market.

I owned a 51cm R3, rode it 200 miles, tore it down and sold the frame/fork. It rode rough and it was just too short and quick.

The STA my not actually be 73 degrees in all sizes, as the geometry chart suggests. Cervelo merely quotes the TT length and reach, based on the same 73 degree angle, for comparison. The STA is not what affects the weight balance, it's the front-center and chainstay length. The STA merely affects the seatpost setback required to attain a given position relative to the BB.

[Serotta_James]

I would agree with what Dave's said here. The geometry on the smaller bikes can be very problematic for someone who isn't a pro-level bike handler or comfortable with (relatively) large amounts of toe overlap.
I've worked with a few women pro athletes who've had issues adapting to the geometries of the Cervelo road bikes.

Other than this I can't comment intelligently except to defer to folks like Jack and several TT specialists I know who swear by the their Cervelo machines.
From an industry stand-point they do seem to bring an intense amount of focus to their product line and the technology behind their design and production. The simple formula of simple product line and protour sponsorship has been hugely profitable for them over the past two or three years.

[cpg]

From an industry stand-point they do seem to bring an intense amount of focus to their product line and the technology behind their design and production.


SJ-

What do you mean by that sentence? I'm not calling you out. Just trying to understand what you mean.

Curt

[SoCalSteve]

SJ-

What do you mean by that sentence? I'm not calling you out. Just trying to understand what you mean.

Curt

Not to speak for SJ (who could) but I think he means they have a LARGE marketing budget...

[Serotta_James]

Rather than trying to get sales by introducing a wide product line to cover all the bases and market segments, they've developed a streamlined and well thought out product line based on what seems to be good science. Then they've marketed heavily showing off that science. Their marketing reflects the fact that focus on the product.

[Climb01742]

or perhaps said another way: instead of building what many people want, cervelo makes many people want what they build.

[swoop]

you can make a bike in 15 stock sizes or you can make four. you can spend that money on molds or on marketing. it is the bicycle business... and these are tough decisions....
but if you just spend it on 4 molds you better rationalize it in the marketing somehow... and they do have a rationale.

its a great bike.. but its limitations are in its geometry in smaller sizes.

you have to do the math and also understand its not just about making a bike, its about making a business. i see the logic behind the thought.. hey bikes sizes are proportional.. there is no real need to change seat tube angle if it can be done at the top of the seat post....?

it just happens to not translate well in function for a my end of the market. that it also manages to be a functional angle for much of the market is good unless you're not in that group.

life is about trade-offs.

[cpg]

or perhaps said another way: instead of building what many people want, cervelo makes many people want what they build.


How is that different than any other production bike company? I mean they design a bike, place the order, receive a container from Taiwan and now they've got to sell'em.

Curt

[chrisroph]

People don't seem to like the little ones. They seem whacked. My 56 rides great and fits fine, very much like a standard serotta 57 with a low head tube. The effective top tube fits longer than the specs suggest. I thought I would need a long 14 (ritchey, deda, etc) but a long 13 works well.

[CalfeeFly]

Jim Langley just tested one for RoadBikeRider.com I copied it since their reviews do not stay as an "open" link for very long. I found it to be an interesting review. It is in two parts due to length.

Cervélo Soloist
Carbon Road Bike

By Jim Langley

www.cervelo.com
Price: $3,200 for frame/fork; $4,400 with Ultegra; $5,400 with Dura-Ace; $6,900 as tested with personal component choices
Source: Cervélo dealers, www.excelsports.com
Sizes: 48, 51, 54, 56 (tested), 58 and 61 cm (all compact)
Weight: frame, 2.89 lb. (1.31 kg); fork, 0.5 lb. (240 g); seatpost, 0.45 lb. (205 g); bike as tested, 16.25 lb. (7.37 kg)
Components: Dura-Ace group, Dura-Ace 7801 wheels with Hutchinson tubeless tires, Selle Italia SLR Carbon saddle, Ritchey 4Axis Matrix stem, Kestrel EMS Pro SL handlebar
RBR advertiser: no
How obtained: cold cash
Tested: 1,000 miles, mostly in road races

HOT!

*so efficient you'll hammer, climb and sprint like never before
*buffers road vibrations beautifully for a go-all-day ride
* aero frame profile is slippery into wind
*aero seatpost matches integrated designs with none of the hassles
* stunning paint finish and prestigious marque
not!

* large hollow tubes transmit and amplify every noise
*seatpost shim needed but not supplied with bike
*aero frame profile catches heavy crosswinds

zoom!


They say that as you age you become more content with what you have and less likely to feel the need for change -- be it upgrading your Sylvania for a plasma, trading in your Camry for a Prius, or replacing that steel, aluminum or titanium road bike for one of today's carbon flyers.

I don't know if that's true. But I can tell you that even while the local bicycle shops slowly filled with carbon featherweights, even while the pro peloton went plastic, and even while my racing buds started riding and raving about their composite wonders, this 54-year-old roadie stubbornly refused to upgrade his 1999 titanium bike, telling anyone who asked that I didn't believe anything could climb, corner or cruise better -- high-tech composite technology be damned.

What an idiot. Whether it was the onslaught of middle age, my frugal Scot blood or whatever, my ignorance cost me about four years (some 20,000 miles) that I could have been out there enjoying the incredible benefits of modern technology.

Carbon Credentials

Enter my new dream ride and the subject of this road test, a Cervélo Soloist Carbon. (It's pronounced sir-velo, which is a made-up name from the words cerebellum and velo, meaning "brain bike.")

If you follow pro racing you already know about this thoroughbred. It's been one of the most-winning machines for the past couple of years under team CSC, ridden by aces such as Jens Voigt, Stuart O'Grady and Fabian Cancellara, who wore the yellow jersey for six days in the '07 Tour de France. Impressively, Cervélos have won the last two Paris-Roubaix classics and been voted the top bike by cyclingnews.com in back-to-back seasons.

These stellar results, and the fact that my good buddy Antonio, who has painstakingly analyzed and road tested every super bike out there, got a Cervélo and couldn't stop raving about it, convinced me to stop living in the past and hop on the carbon express. Contributing was my decision to start road racing again and wanting every ounce of modern technology at my command.

Difficult Decision

Still, it took me awhile to decide to buy the Soloist. I was hung up on the huge down tube, which is more than three inches tall. I worried that the bike would be too stiff and might beat up my damaged back. I also reasoned that a down tube that large would have to be heavy, and I wanted a lighter race bike than my Ti ride (16.8 pounds). I initially thought that the fire-engine-red paint and billboard-size graphics looked garish, too.

Mind you, I had not seen the bike in person, only on Cervélo's website and in pictures in cycling magazines. After weeks of analysis paralysis and plenty of goading from Antonio and riding pals who insisted I'd go faster on it, I decided that if the bike could win pro races I should quit worrying and place the order.

Due to heavy demand for these highly touted and successful bicycles it took awhile for my Soloist to arrive. When I was finally able to open the box, I was thrilled.

A Stunner of a Bike

The paint job that looks so bold in pictures is even more so in person. The finish is super high quality -- liquid, glossy and deep with the giant Cervélo logos so nicely integrated there are no perceptible transitions. Plus, as a compact monocoque aero frame, every tube is elegantly shaped and blends into the next. The internal cables seem to melt into the down and top tubes, maximizing aerodynamics, preventing rattles and easing cleaning. (Click photo to zoom.)

Overall, the effect is more Lamborghini than two-wheeler, and it grows on you fast. It doesn't hurt that on every ride someone comments how cool this bike looks.

When you're standing over the Soloist rather than viewing a photo, you can see that the huge down tube is only that way from the side. The tube's top is razorblade thin while the bottom is round, which creates a wing profile.

Running your hands over the other tubes (because you can't just look at this bike, you have to touch it), you feel that the seat tube, top tube, stays, seatpost, and even the head tube are aero, too. Same for the Wolf fork, which is so aero the blades look, well, blade-like.

Windcheater

Believing that a racing bike's aerodynamics are among its most important attributes, Cervélo engineers Phil White and Gérard Vroomen went to great pains to make the Soloist as aero as possible. Currently, the industry trend is to offer the lightest carbon bicycle. But lightness mainly helps when you're climbing. Reducing wind drag results in energy savings all the time.

Cervélo's wind tunnel tests show a 3% gain over standard-tube bicycles. This delivers an additional 10 meters each kilometer -- a significant edge in time trials or in breakaways, as Cancellara has nicely demonstrated. To me the aerodynamics are most noticeable on descents and in pacelines because I seem to be riding the brakes more than ever. Free speed is a lot better than speed earned by pedaling.

It's worth noting that these same engineers created Cervélo's P3, one of the trickest and winningest time trial and triathlon bikes, so they've proven their aero expertise. This brings up a Soloist special feature. If you plan to TT or tri, you can purchase Cervélo's two-position seatpost. It features a forward position effectively increasing the seat-tube angle to 76 degrees for even more streamlining. Add aero bars and you'll be ready to fly.

Slick Seatpost

Speaking of the seatpost, Cervélo's is not an integrated design (also called a "seat mast") like on superbikes such as Giant's TCR Advanced Team and Trek's new Madone. Still, the Soloist boasts a post every bit as aero as the frame it fits into. It's almost two inches wide and probably as efficient as a true integrated post. Thanks to its aero shape, the post can't swivel so you never need to align the seat with the frame, a nice benefit.

Even better, unlike with integrated seatposts, there's no need to cut this one to the correct length or use special pieces to size it, as required by Trek's new Madone. The Cervélo post is removable for easy bike shipping, too.

There was one issue that required fine-tuning: a bit of play between the post and frame that was apparent as a slight knock when lifting the bike by the seat. The fix is a thin shim installed when inserting the post. I wouldn't mention this if Cervélo chose to, but I had to figure out how to stop the play. I've since found that shims are available from excelsports.com.

Power to Spare

The Soloist delivers power wonderfully. I swear I gain a couple of centimeters with each pedal stroke on climbs, and my jump and sprint, always non-factors in races, have begun to have a little sting. What's at work here is the way the oversize down tube, seat tube and chainstays brace the bottom bracket for maximum pedal power. That oversize seatpost reduces flex, too.

If you glance down you can't help but notice the difference compared to traditional bottom bracket intersections. It's obvious that there's no place for your effort to go but to the road. (Click photo to zoom.)

I can put numbers on the efficiency gain: 3.12 gear inches, or the difference between the 39x27-tooth gear (39 inches) I formerly rode up hills and the 39x25 (42.1) that now feels just as same. This lets me hang that much better when the road goes vertical. Maybe more telling is 1.49 watts per kilogram, the difference between my output on my old and new bicycles on the 5-mile climb my coach uses to test power (same components and wheels on both bikes).

Helping boost stiffness is Cervélo's Smartwall technology. The sides of the aero tubes are butted to boost lateral stiffness, but they're thinned on the leading and trailing edges for vertical compliance.

[CalfeeFly]

Jim Langley Soloist Review Part 2

Magic-Carpet Ride

The boost in pedal power is awesome, but the biggest shocker to me is the Soloist's ride quality. This is the most efficient road bike I've owned, and it's more comfortable than my Ti bike. I heard that this would be the case from Antonio and carbon fans, yet I'd never felt it on other carbon bikes I've tested. They were nice, but they didn't glide over rough pavement, insulating me from abuse nearly as well as titanium does.

The Soloist's vibration damping was immediately apparent. Rough roads are a little less so and there's no buzzing at the bar or seat. I'm more comfortable and less fatigued on rides. Keep in mind that the bike boasts a carbon seatpost, and I built it with a carbon seat, handlebar and stem, too, to take advantage of carbon's inherent damping abilities. Someday I hope to try carbon wheels. In the meantime I'm riding Shimano Dura-Ace hoops with Hutchinson tubeless clincher tires, which is the ultimate wheel/tire combination I've found so far. (Note to Premium Site members: See my review of these wheels and tires in the Product Test archive.)

I'm convinced that a major contributing factor to the excellent all-around ride is use of the same material throughout the frameset. On my titanium bike I have a carbon fork. It's fine, but I can sense a difference in the materials. The Soloist has a more balanced or integrated feel that surely helps the superb all-around ride characteristics.

[CalfeeFly]

I made a mistake and did not copy the end. Jim Langley's review of the Cervelo Soloist.

Not Superlight

At 16.25 pounds, the Soloist is the lightest bicycle I've owned. There are plenty of 14-pound carbon machines out there, although none as aero as the Soloist, unless you want to go with Cervélo's lighter Soloist, the SLC-SL, which weighs 200 grams (7.14 ounces) less but costs $1,300 more.

Or, if aero is not your thing, check out Cervélo's Paris-Roubaix-winning R3 SL, which at about 840 grams (1.88 lbs.) is one of the lightest frames in the world -- and apparently one of the toughest, too.

When you build up one of these carbon flyweights, it's a strange experience. The frame, fork and carbon components have almost no heft. Installing them doesn't feel "right," as if you can't get things tight enough and they'll move or slip when you're riding. I studied up before the build to get it right, then followed the recommended assembly procedures and fastened everything to the correct torque. Even so, I was concerned on my initial rides that something would loosen or snap.

Now, nearly a thousand hard racing miles later, I know better. As long as you follow directions carefully, torque things properly and use quality components, carbon bikes can handle anything. Sucking wheels in pacelines on my Soloist, I've hit unseen holes so hard I almost crashed. I've bunny-hopped other obstacles, landing less than delicately. I weigh 170 pounds (77.3 kg) and these abuses have had no effect whatsoever on the frame or components.

Carbon is more prone to failure from damage that begins as a cut or nick, so you wouldn't want to toss your machine on top of a pile of other bikes or let it fall against a parking meter. But, that wouldn't be good for a metal frame, either.

Carbon's Evolution

Now that I'm aboard a carbon bike right out of the pro ranks, I run into other riders like I used to be. They're still holding out, unconvinced by the popularity of composite materials. They want to know what changed that suddenly catapulted carbon to the front of the peloton.

I believe what's happened is that so many companies have begun building composite frames since the inception of the first production bike, the 1975 Exxon Graftek, that the technology has advanced to where we're finally getting the ride that's been promised all these years.

Carbon is a fabric comprised of threads, meaning that current designers (aided by sophisticated software) can fine-tune the material and how best to use it, almost to the molecular level. They can determine the optimum thread direction, number of layers, orientation of lay-up and what other composites to include to dial the ride to perfection. The result is new standards in efficiency, comfort and lightness. And you can bet on the technology continuing to improve.

In part this carbon revolution explains how a 12-year-old Canadian company called Cervélo -- not an Italian, Asian or U.S. firm as you might expect -- could match up with the Treks and Giants of the bike industry. Like most companies producing composite superbikes today, Cervélo has its frames made in China. They're formed from proprietary specifications developed at company headquarters in Toronto.

If you're still holding out, I recommend heading to your local bike shop and taking a test ride on a Cervélo or the carbon flyer of your choice. I think you'll be amazed.

[benb]

My only prevailing thought on Cervelo is the accent on the e does not make any sense... They are French Canadian right?

The accent on the e in my understanding would dictate the pronunciation should be "Sir-Vay-Lo"...

But they clearly want it said "Sir-Vel-O"...

Maybe they just thought the Accent looked cool.

Part of my amusement with this is my last name is french, ends in "e" and has an accent on the E.

My name has been mispronounced wrong my entire life.. it is supposed to end in an "ay" sound just like I would expect Cervelo to.