Complete Serotta for 4Gs

[jblande]

the news here (http://www.bikerumor.com/2010/09/01/serotta-debuts-new-colorado-ready-custom-bicycle-deal/)

Looks like Serotta would like to attract a broader audience...

[AngryScientist]

very cool.

[vqdriver]

i saw the green trimmed one at san diego. very nice.

[nahtnoj]

I'm interested in the age/demographic they are targeting with these?

[William]

They took my "affordable race iron" comments to heart!!! :cool: ;)

Nice offering.




William

[SoCalSteve]

the news here (http://www.bikerumor.com/2010/09/01/serotta-debuts-new-colorado-ready-custom-bicycle-deal/)

Looks like Serotta would like to attract a broader audience...

Talked about a while ago here: From Serotta Stan (http://forums.thepaceline.net/showpost.php?p=801250&postcount=23)

[Ozz]

wow...they are using their C5S tubes for these....that is the same stuff used on the CSI / CDA / CIII top of the line frames....pretty cool. :beer:

[Benjamin]

component listing anywhere?

i'd guess 4k buys one of these frames with rival/105/athena-level stuff.

[dancinkozmo]

component listing anywhere?

i'd guess 4k buys one of these frames with rival/105/athena-level stuff.

pics on the bikerumour page show deda stem/seatpost and ultegra crank deraillers/shifters.

[chuckroast]

I'm not usually a big fan of slopers but those bikes are good lookin'...

[roguedog]

pretty... like it.

[Serotta_Stan]

What would you want your friends to ride?
In the compete bikes that we are rolling out with the trade right now, we created some "Tried and True" kits with Ben, Steve Fairchild and Scott Hock in the office. Everything is something that we and/or would want our friends to ride.

[rugbysecondrow]

What would you want your friends to ride?
In the compete bikes that we are rolling out with the trade right now, we created some "Tried and True" kits with Ben, Steve Fairchild and Scott Hock in the office. Everything is something that we and/or would want our friends to ride.

nice...looks like some good thought went into these. I think you guys will hit the ball out of the park with these.

[TimmyB]

I think you guys will hit the ball out of the park with these.
+1! Now I just need to start saving my pennies :beer:

[Elefantino]

Do these bikes increase the value of mine?

;) :banana: ;) :banana: ;)

[Ahneida Ride]

Stan ..

This is a smart move ...

Many of us have been screaming (loudly and softly) for such an event.

Oz seen these bikes at the factory..... Nice !!!!! :beer:

[Jason E]

What would you want your friends to ride?
In the compete bikes that we are rolling out with the trade right now, we created some "Tried and True" kits with Ben, Steve Fairchild and Scott Hock in the office. Everything is something that we and/or would want our friends to ride.

Look, it is a beautiful bike, sure. Top end build quality and tube selection. You lost me at sloped TT. 2-3degree on a smaller frame? I'd take that, but what is that, 8? PLEASE tell me it comes in a level TT and I am about to rant for nothing...

These are Serottas from the people that made the Serotta that young new Trek Kid's Dad used to pull an American Cipollini on. I would have wanted to see a flat TT race sled. A gaping hole in the market (maybe not gaping) left by the Cervelo Superprodigy or THIS (http://forums.thepaceline.net/showthread.php?t=24097&highlight=hotlanta) little gem I lifted off of 93legendti a few years back while waiting for my Serotta, from Serotta, and is to this day my favorite.

I think a level TT would give the brand more credibility. I think the association with an older demographic has to end. There are plenty of younger guys dropping $4-$7,000 on bikes that would eat this up.

I hope a level TT is an option. It is MUCH more important then a carbon rear.

(All that said, they are purdy.)

[timto]

Wow that is really really amazing! The bikes look really really great. Great work.

I'm running out of excuses for not having a serotta...


What would you want your friends to ride?
In the compete bikes that we are rolling out with the trade right now, we created some "Tried and True" kits with Ben, Steve Fairchild and Scott Hock in the office. Everything is something that we and/or would want our friends to ride.

[victoryfactory]

I love that they have apparently gone with steel seat stays instead of those
overly stiff common carbon plug-ins.

I really don't think that horizontal top tubes are even on the radar of 98%
of bike buyers these days. Let it go, luddites. Get a custom build if you want that

Serotta should not be too stubborn on the parts selection. Every major bike
company has discovered that a few careful decisions on parts like cranksets,
bars, stem, post and saddle can really lower the MRSP without lessening the
performance.

The real challenges will be:

Convincing a buyer to spend 4K on a steel (heavier) bike in a world where
17 lb carbon with better known (by the general public) names can be had.

Gearing up to produce these bikes in the numbers needed to fill the
orders without impacting the traditional custom program.
Serotta has tried "stock" programs before. Made in USA with this level of
craftsmanship takes time and resources way beyond the current Chinese
model.

My marketing strategy here would be;

This is a real Serotta, not a low priced compromise
Custom fitting for all these years has given Serotta the edge in presenting
the rider with a much higher level of stock sizes than any other brand.
Steel has evolved and is "back" as a great material.
Focus on the fit and ride quality, emphasize the unbroken line of great bike
makers of the past leading up to Serotta, Advertising should have images of
famous racers on their Serotta made frames.
Like:
See that bike that was ridden to the world championship? Do you know
who made it? See that bike under Davis Phinney? See that bike that says
Huffy?, etc, etc.
Why go with just another cookie cutter Chinese made stamped out frame
when you can make a statement about craft, tradition and exclusivity.
You can see for yourself what it's like to ride a piece of
history.STEEL IS REAL! etc....


GO SEROTTA!

I hope your new team gets it done. I will not sue you if you use my ad ideas.

VF

[majorpat]

Didn't they try this with the "Heritage" frame a year or two ago? It was a level TT all steel rig, can't remember what the price was. As I recall that frame hit the scene and was gone before I knew it. Hope this is an effort to make a long term committment to reasonably priced bikes. I had one of the early Fierte stell bikes with Ultegra that was a lot less than $4k. Let the frame go for a song (probably a mistake but Too Tall assure me it was under a motivated new racer so I feel good about that) and have been on a alu cannondale since. If these make a go, I may be back on a Serotta. Just can't justify the cake for an Ottrot, etc.
Good luck Serotta, steel is not just retro...it's really metal!

Pat

[AndrewS]

Would this be the equivalent of a Gunnar Waterford, or much nicer?

[rnhood]

If a Serotta fit is included then its a pretty good deal, especially given an Ultegra package which is a first rate group by any measure. Seems to me that if a first time buyer comes into a shop and can get a professional fit and a top shelf American made bike all for 4 bills then its a recipe for en extremely happy customer. And if he is happy the first time around, he will never forget the brand that made him happy.

I also like level top tubes but like Victory said, it probably isn't even on the radar screen of a first time buyer, and probably most any buyer today who puts fit, finish and performance first.

[Jason E]

I also like level top tubes but like Victory said, it probably isn't even on the radar screen of a first time buyer, and probably most any buyer today who puts fit, finish and performance first.

I hear you both, but still think... This is still not ANYONE's first time bike. Also, I think if it came with a level top tube it could attract the same crowd that gets a Club Racer or Steel Crown Jewel.

I think level TT's are classic, and I do not think that makes anyone a Luddite. I just think there is a demographic that will NOT look at these the way they are and they are younger than many think.

I want these to be hip, not fail.

[AndrewS]

You can fit more people with compacts, which is a plus.

[victoryfactory]

I like level TT's too. I have 2 steel bikes with them.
But my comments were from the POV of marketing this
new line of bikes to the widest range of customers, not what I
personally might prefer.


Sorry about the "luddite" wisecrack, you luddites.

VF

[oldmill]

I like the idea of this, but the price seems attractive only in comparison to Serotta's other steel offering, which appears to me to be way out of line with other full-custom TIG'd steel bikes out there. I guess we'll have to wait and see the details.

[Jason E]

I like level TT's too. I have 2 steel bikes with them.
But my comments were from the POV of marketing this
new line of bikes to the widest range of customers, not what I
personally might prefer.


Sorry about the "luddite" wisecrack, you luddites.

VF


I hear you. I was not offended. I usually refer to other people on here as Luddites, whilst reading their posts, so if anything I was surprised!

I understand the marketing you are speaking of, I just think maybe it is time for the big "S" to bring back a little edge. Shake the old dentist image.

No offense to the old dentists on here, I am not an anti-dentite.

I would say if they are using the existing geometry that the CDA has, 9 Pro and 9 Performance, that maybe the Pro be a little more level, if not level all together..

I also have an issue with the statement that you can fit more people on a sloped TT bike. I am not sure you can fit more people properly by offering the frame in a sloped geometry. There is more to it than just the height of the seat cluster.

So this is weird, perhaps I am not being clear in defining if I am arguing the old purist angle or the younger race sled angle. I just think, again, there is a market that is being shrugged aside by offering these in these geo's. I think that a lot of fit guys would ride/race these if they came a little more aggressively designed. To put a name on it, I would say that I am referring to the market share that has moved across the hall and buys bikes from Zanc, Sasha, and the crew at IF. That is very much a valid segment, as that genre of riders are lifers to the sport/lifestyle as well, and whether they are in their late 20's or in their late 50's they have weathered the storm and also continue to buy bikes. They are not that fringe of a fringe.

Older riders that are out of shape and may be newer to the sport are not your repeat business. I own a Serotta because of Ben, Andy H., Mr. Phinney, not because I see some guy take a weird shaped one off the back of his ML on a Saturday at the shop. I long for an edgier stock "S", but every year I guess it is further from happening.

Help us O-ben-wan, you're our only hope.

JE

JE

[AndrewS]

I also have an issue with the statement that you can fit more people on a sloped TT bike. I am not sure you can fit more people properly by offering the frame in a sloped geometry. There is more to it than just the height of the seat cluster. Try finding a level top tube frame for someone 5'8" with a 29" inseam. Sloping top tubes gives you a larger range of seat heights for a given reach. No amount of "proper fitting" is going to a 50cm fit someone 5'8", or allow someone with a short 29" inseam to stand over a 54cm.

Sloping top tubes fit more people.




They are also ugly. But if you had to pick only one...
(And you don't. Several makers offer both types of frames.)

[Jason E]

Try finding a level top tube frame for someone 5'8" with a 29" inseam. Sloping top tubes gives you a larger range of seat heights for a given reach. No amount of "proper fitting" is going to a 50cm fit someone 5'8", or allow someone with a short 29" inseam stand over a 54cm.

Sloping top tubes fit more people.

I'm 5'8, I have a 29.5" inseam. I have no problems.

I understand your thinking, but if the design is not custom, then sloping top tubes still do not necessarily place the correct HT length for you. It is higher, but not necessarily correct. Even if it IS correct for you, there are others that will want the front end lower and have the ST height you want.

It also may limit the taller end of the inseam range from this particular model. You may argue he could add a longer Seat-post, I would argue you could add a shorter Seat-post.

But let us look at you and me again, I have no issues with a lot of manufacturers stock frames, you do. No big deal, could come down to flexibility or other issues... I'm saying they should have the performance fit, but also the pro fit. BOTH of our wants and desires would be met, instead of having a bunch of slopers for the masses.

Lastly, Compact geometry came out to stiffen main triangles, not address fit issues. Looking at the thousands of custom geo's that were reviewed for this, the sloping TT's came about so as to raise the front, not lower the back end.

It's all how you look at it, but knowing the demographic and having fit a lot of bikes to people, they want up in the front. I would often tell them a part of this is the lack of the moving dynamic. A perfectly fitting bike feels hand heavy on a level trainer. This is another reason the stationary trainers market blocks for the front wheel and most people ride "up-hill" in their garage all winter. It is more comfortable when you do not have the resistive force of the wind and the forward momentum of the bike holding you up a little. I would bet we could fit 99% of people blindfolded on a size cycle and then knock .5mm off of the HT during the build and their first ride would be perfect.

[AndrewS]

But let us look at you and me again, I have no issues with a lot of manufacturers stock frames, you do.
Huh? I like stock frames, and don't know where you are getting any information to the contrary.

Basic compact geometry is simply a lowered seat cluster, not necessarily a taller head tube. Tall head tubes are currently found on both compact and "not compact" frames - they are a feature that is independant of the ratio of seat tube to virtual top tube length that originally defined the compact frame.

You are right in thinking that a compact frame that has a TALL head tube might be a problem for some riders, but a "normal" head tube height is usually fit-able, as long as the steerer tube is long enough. However, tall head tubes can also be dealt with by using shorter stack heights and level stems.

So, for clarity: In the case of a traditional 56cm frame, with a 56cm top tube and a 14cm head tube vs. a compact frame with a 56cm virtual top tube, 14cm head tube and 49cm seat tube, the compact will fit both "normal" shaped people and those with short inseams. The traditional will not fit those whose inseams are shorter than 30", because the seat won't go down any further. But someone who's 5'9" with a 29" inseam is not going to be made comfortable on a bike with a top tube greatly shorter than 56cm (as an example). The compact gives them the reach their upper body needs while accomdating a lower seat height they can't get from a traditional, as well as the (less important) standover height.

I can't tell from just looking at the picture whether these new "bargain" Serottas have tall head tubes or not, so I didn't comment on that. It seems to be presumed that they do, though.

[David Kirk]

The whole 'sloping' vs 'compact' vs 'level' thing is silly at it's core. If you don't like the look of sloped top tube I can respect that but otherwise it means nothing.

There are three contact points with the bike and, within reason, it's almost irrelevant how you connect those points. Of course things like stem length and front center are important but beyond that it's fashion.

It seems as if some put a value beyond the aesthetic on the top tube slope or lack thereof or that they associate a sloped top tube with a long/short head tube. One can not make any sweeping generalizations about fit or position based on the fact that the top tube is sloped. It's like trying to tell how high your bars will be based on the head tube length - it's seems like you can, but in the end, you can't.

Windy and cold here today - only good for a ride in one direction.

Dave

[AndrewS]

David, I agree with you for the most part. Compacts don't do anything by definition. But you can put the seat down further for a given top tube length, which was the point I was making. In other words, they give you more range to put one of those contact points. And that might be what was attractive to Serotta in this case.

Everything else; performance, stem height, etc depends on the particular design.

[David Kirk]

David, I agree with you for the most part. Compacts don't do anything by definition. But you can put the seat down further for a given top tube length, which was the point I was making. In other words, they give you more range to put one of those contact points. And that might be what was attractive to Serotta in this case.

Everything else; performance, stem height, etc depends on the particular design.

I think we agree. Once the contact points are set it matters little how you connect the dots. True that a sloping top tube will often result in a shorter seat tube and the ability to lower the saddle while keeping the bars higher. But this is not a function of a sloped top tube but one of a short seat tube and a longer head tube joined as need be by the top tube.

One thing that a sloped top tube (or whatever you prefer to call it) does it make it harder to estimate who the bike will fit. In the olden days it was easy - seat tube and top tube length and you knew more or less where you would end up. Now, with virtual seat and top tube lengths it's much less obvious what is right for you.

Semantics maybe - but what else is there?

dave

[majorpat]

Check out Limmer Boots. $625 and 4 years gets their custom made hiking boots but you can get off the shelf sizes for less than half of that. I got a stock pair because I appreciate that they are made just like the customs (though by a sub in Germany instead of by their guys in New Hampshire) at a lower price. I'd probably get a ready custom frame for the same reason, I know it is well thought out and made right though not custom. It's a winner if they can get giys like me back, I started to give up owning another Serotta around the time the Meivici hit the market. Puts more folks on Serotta's.

Pat

http://limmercustomboot.com/

[AndrewS]

Dave,

We're on the same page. :)

I think a good thing that compacts have done is emphasize that top tube length is about the only sizing dimension that really matters for stock bikes. The old standover height method led to more confusion than help if the person was long or short waisted, and was a real problem if you are comparing a 51cm Merlin (53.5cm top tube) with someone else's 51cm that is only 52cm on top. C-C vs. C-T causing even more angst.

Now we say "I'd like a 54cm top tube on a traditional frame" or "I want a 58cm top tube and an extended head tube".

I really think height is a better guestimator for frame size than inseam for men, anyway.

[Pete Serotta]

I was looking at them online because I had a paid 20 years ago from them, A 4 year wait is longer than my need for some boots.

QUOTE=majorpat]Check out Limmer Boots. $625 and 4 years gets their custom made hiking boots but you can get off the shelf sizes for less than half of that. I got a stock pair because I appreciate that they are made just like the customs (though by a sub in Germany instead of by their guys in New Hampshire) at a lower price. I'd probably get a ready custom frame for the same reason, I know it is well thought out and made right though not custom. It's a winner if they can get giys like me back, I started to give up owning another Serotta around the time the Meivici hit the market. Puts more folks on Serotta's.

Pat

http://limmercustomboot.com/[/QUOTE]

[victoryfactory]

The whole 'sloping' vs 'compact' vs 'level' thing is silly at it's core. If you don't like the look of sloped top tube I can respect that but otherwise it means nothing.
There are three contact points with the bike and, within reason, it's almost irrelevant how you connect those points.
Dave

Dave - once again, the voice of reason.

BTW, I AM 5'-8" with a 29" inseam (on a tall day)
I have been riding for 35 years and although I've owned some nice bikes with
horizontal TT, It had always been a problem standing over a bike that was
otherwise fine at the contact points, as mentioned above by andrewS.

I got a fitting for my Legend Ti in 2003 and was determined to fix that
problem since I was buying a bike that could be a "lifer"

In my best pseudo-know-it-all quasi-tech well researched jargon, having
decided that sloping TT might solve my standover issues, I told Paul Levine
that what I really wanted was for him to spec a traditional level TT bike for
my ape like body, and then just "lower" the TT and slant it 5*

Well, The result was the best fitting bike I have ever owned.
I understand the gut reaction by purists against sloping TT, but as Dave
said, you can move a TT without screwing up the contact points.

VF

photo of my actual bike and photo of what it might have looked like with
level, "Nutcracker Suite" design (please forgive sloppy photoshopping.)
When feeling more fit, I flip the stem for ~4cm bar below saddle. In the current position it's 1cm below saddle

[majorpat]

Serotta Pete,

The stock Limmer's are proving to be great. Just getting them broken in these past two weeks and so far, so good. I got the Lightweights which are more like a mid-weight or even heavy backpacking boots. They are made the same way as the customs (one piece of leather) by Meindl in Germany. Anyway, to answer your question, I would get them. I wore Vasque Sundowners for many years and these may be a bit heavier but already fit better (less toe banging in the front). To order, you take 5 foot measurements and trace your two feet. They sent me a 1/2 size smaller than I normally wear but they are right on the money. In fact, these boots ARE money! Good luck.

Pat