Cervelo Caledonia

[prototoast]

Originally Posted by weiwentg

Actually, do we know that they have general QA problems for a fact, or does this stem from Hambini?

From people I know who have owned Cervelos, they seem to have failures that require warranty replacement more than many other bike brands. Lots of cracks around the bottom bracket in some older models. Then they had some with some absolutely horrendous shift cable routing that was constantly creating problems. Don't have good data, but talk of Cervelo's poor engineering has predated today's generation of youtube channels.

[old fat man]

That Cervelo is aesthetically pleasing - not something I often think when I see a Cervelo.

Other brands have already been offering road oriented options with massive clearance. I'd like to see the next generation of Canyons with fully hidden cable routing. The new Specialized Tarmac SL7 looks sweet too.

[Elefantino]

Reminds me of the "How can you still ride 23s?" question, which is morphing into the "How can you still ride 25s?" question.

[Andreas]

Originally Posted by prototoast

From people I know who have owned Cervelos, they seem to have failures that require warranty replacement more than many other bike brands. Lots of cracks around the bottom bracket in some older models. Then they had some with some absolutely horrendous shift cable routing that was constantly creating problems. Don't have good data, but talk of Cervelo's poor engineering has predated today's generation of youtube channels.

Providing some context: Riding in Northern New England (NH/VT) means riding dirt roads, because more roads are unpaved than paved. Some of the them are smoother than the cracked tarmac. Note that this is not "gravel".

Two local LBS' have discontinued carrying Cervelos due to the many warranty replacements. This is in comparison (incidence rate at LBS) to other carbon brands.

One of them is now carrying OpenUP. Lots of cracks with them at the seatstay - bb junction. So I am hearing that they will likely be a thing of the past as well.

[zap]

I received emails from a number of etailers announcing the new Cervelo's and moved said emails to the trash folder without opening them.

[FlashUNC]

Cervelo still using horrid geometries or did they finally get that fixed?

[Mark McM]

Scotland? Who pict that name?

[AndresLD]

Originally Posted by FlashUNC

Cervelo still using horrid geometries or did they finally get that fixed?

What about it & Gerard's geometries do you dislike so much?

[FlashUNC]

Originally Posted by AndresLD

What about it & Gerard's geometries do you dislike so much?

I remember the heady days of using the same STA, HA, fork rake, and chainstay length across an entire range of bikes. And any wonder why the bikes on the smaller and larger ends of that spectrum handled like garbage.

For years they seemed divorced from the idea others had figured out that a large frame isn't just a small frame with the proportions ballooned out.

[Mark McM]

Originally Posted by FlashUNC

I remember the heady days of using the same STA, HA, fork rake, and chainstay length across an entire range of bikes. And any wonder why the bikes on the smaller and larger ends of that spectrum handled like garbage.

For years they seemed divorced from the idea others had figured out that a large frame isn't just a small frame with the proportions ballooned out.

They still do this, to a large extent*. And I don't think it is a bad as as you make out. Some of the variation in frame angles with frame size is an attempt to compensate for using the same size wheels on all frames, even on smaller frames that would be better off with smaller wheels. As far as "handling like garbage" - this is largely a subjective thing. When riders get used to riding bikes of a common geometry, then riding a bike with different geometry might seem awkward at first. But if they rode a bike with slighly unusual geometry for a long time, then riding a bike with a common geometry might feel like garbage.

I ride frames toward the smaller end, and I like that Cervelo doesn't compromise the fit and handling on smaller frames with a too-steep seat tube angle and a too-shallow head angle.

*Looking at the geometry charts for the R-series of road frames, it appears that all sizes have the same 73 degree seat tube angle, the same 57mm of steering trail and the same 410mm chainstays. Where the differ is that the smallest two sizes have slightly steeper head angles (this was likely done for toe clearance), with forks with increased offset to compensate. The larger frames also have less BB drop, likely to compensate the longer cranks more likely to be used by taller riders.

[AndresLD]

Originally Posted by FlashUNC

I remember the heady days of using the same STA, HA, fork rake, and chainstay length across an entire range of bikes. And any wonder why the bikes on the smaller and larger ends of that spectrum handled like garbage.

For years they seemed divorced from the idea others had figured out that a large frame isn't just a small frame with the proportions ballooned out.

I think by this logic a lot of the non-custom bikes are going to fall into that category of having garbage geometries.

Though I do agree on your point about smaller & larger bikes, I'm not a Cervelo fan, was more so during the Vroomen White days. However, I really enjoy my 56... though anytime I ride a 54, 51, or 58 they do ride like crap.

[jonbek]

Well, I've decided to be my own guinea pig on this one, and ordered a Caledonia today. So... we'll see.

[jimoots]

Originally Posted by Andreas

One of them is now carrying OpenUP. Lots of cracks with them at the seatstay - bb junction. So I am hearing that they will likely be a thing of the past as well.

Do you mean chain stay / bb junction? Seat stay doesn’t intersect the bb.

The open chain stay is an accident waiting to happen, the bend is a stress concentrator. Carbon hates harsh angles.

[RoosterCogset]

Originally Posted by AndresLD

I think by this logic a lot of the non-custom bikes are going to fall into that category of having garbage geometries.

Though I do agree on your point about smaller & larger bikes, I'm not a Cervelo fan, was more so during the Vroomen White days. However, I really enjoy my 56... though anytime I ride a 54, 51, or 58 they do ride like crap.

From what I recall, Jamis is pretty good at frame-size geo adjustments to ensure comparable handling across its size range.

A quick look at the Renegade geometry chart, across the sizes, shows usage of 3 fork rakes, 5 HAs, and 3 BB drops.

[oldguy00]

Originally Posted by jonbek

Well, I've decided to be my own guinea pig on this one, and ordered a Caledonia today. So... we'll see.

Which model did ya order? Caledonia, or Caledonia-5?
Regardless, I think they look like great bikes. The geo looks like it is about a cm shorter reach than their typical road models, but similar height. I think it will ride very nice.