Canyon, Cervelo: new bike musings

[p nut]

Originally Posted by fignon's barber

I've raced on Canyon Ultimate CF SLX's from 2012 until 2017. I've been on 3 different versions of the model. If I had to guess, I've ridden 30,000 miles on Canyon ( The Canyon shared time with other bikes). IMO, they have good design, average build quality, and not so great durability. I broke the first 2 frames in minor bump ups, with my knee tapping the top tube and crushing it like a hard boiled egg shell. They are cheaper, but the finish is nowhere near the more expensive brands, or even on par with my team mates' Speshies. I think they are popular here because of the "exotic" factor. In summary,I think they are a decent purchase to race on as long as they are cheap. If you have a team deal that puts a top end Speshy,Trek, or Cannondale in the same ballpark, I'd go that route.

That's unfortunate. I like those Canyon bikes. Racy frame with fat tire clearance.

[fignon's barber]

Originally Posted by p nut

That's unfortunate. I like those Canyon bikes. Racy frame with fat tire clearance.

Don't get me wrong, they are decent bikes and when you look at MSRP, they are fairly priced. Just don't expect a masterpiece. You would be disappointed.

[chrisroph]

Neither has the reputation of being particularly durable or well built. You might be better off picking up a couple year old dogma. I had an R3 about 7 years ago and quickly sold it. It rattled and felt flimsy, like it was going to break. Also, I didn't like how it rode and the geometry didn't really suit my preferences.

[Mark McM]

Originally Posted by ckorbey

Harsh in that the 2014 frame's bottom bracket, chain stays and seat stays were massive and incredibly stiff. The rear tire sat in the curve of the seat tube and only allowed for a 23mm tire. The combination of the beefy rear end and 23mm tire made the ride harsh on imperfect surfaces and was a general beating over a long day on the bike.

From what I understand, Cervelo was clear that they intentionally compromised comfort for aerodynamics on my version of the S5. And that the two most recent S5s have thinner seat stays and more tire clearance (I've run a 25mm with no issue).

Counterpoint:

Despite common wisdom, there isn't much comfort to be derived from the back end of any rigid bike frame - even if it does have thin seat stays. The exceptions are frames whose seat stays have exaggerated bends and pivots (such as the Serotta DKS). Typical straight seat stay frames, the frame is the wrong place to look for compliance in the back end.

Cervelo published a chart showing measurements of the contribution to vertical compliance of different bike components, in both the front and rear of the bike. As one might expect, the biggest contributor to ride compliance in the back is the tire, supplying about 50% of the compliance. Of all the components in the load path between the ground and the rider's butt, the frame provided the least amount of compliance, only about 3% of the total. The rider's shorts provided 3 times more compliance than the frame did, and the seatpost provided about 4 times more compliance than the frame did.

I have a Cervelo S5 (2015 model), and I don't find it particularly harsh riding. Of course, I've got the fattest tires that will fit in the frame (26mm) and also a comfortable saddle. If the S5 is harsher than other bikes, it is most likely because it has tight tire clearance (precluding wide low pressure tires) and a stiff aero seatpost.

By the way, for 2018 Cervelo has redesigned the aero seatpost, adding a cantilevered clamp to improve seatpost compliance:

[ckorbey]

Originally Posted by Mark McM

Cervelo published a chart showing measurements of the contribution to vertical compliance of different bike components, in both the front and rear of the bike.

That's super interesting, and a bit surprising. I would have assumed the frameset itself — fit aside — would be much more directly linked to overall comfort.

The real takeaway – I should be better about retiring old, worn out bibs...

[m4rk540]

Test ride a 2018 Tarmac.

[kgreene10]

Originally Posted by m4rk540

Test ride a 2018 Tarmac.

I’ve been considering a test ride, but then I look at the cost (of the bike, not the rest ride itself )

[Kontact]

Originally Posted by ckorbey

I raced an R3 for the last two years. The rest of our team races an S3 or S5, but I felt the geometry on the R3 was a bit more upright and the bike was super light and a great crit / road / long weekend ride bike. I ran 25mm GP4000s on Martindale (Reynolds / White Industry) 50mm carbon clinchers and loved the ride on all types of surfaces.

For reference, my R3 replaced a 2014 S5 (the ugly black and grey one) which was fast, but the most unforgiving bike I've ever ridden. I've never ridden a Canyon, so no help there.

Anything in particular you're wondering about the R3?

Unless something has changed, the S5 and R3 geometry are the same.

[azrider]

This is what I hate about General Discussion "lately"......guy has narrowed his choice to two bikes and asks for opinion on said bikes and all of a sudden you get: 'buy a Tarmac', 'buy a CaaD10', 'Cat3 is beer league'...........smdh

[Kontact]

Originally Posted by ckorbey

That's super interesting, and a bit surprising. I would have assumed the frameset itself — fit aside — would be much more directly linked to overall comfort.

The real takeaway – I should be better about retiring old, worn out bibs...

Since all bike have tires and saddles, this chart can be a little misleading. Given that all of those other things are equal, the question is whether you can feel the 5% that comes from the frame. I would say many people can.

[m4rk540]

Originally Posted by azrider

This is what I hate about General Discussion "lately"......guy has narrowed his choice to two bikes and asks for opinion on said bikes and all of a sudden you get: 'buy a Tarmac', 'buy a CaaD10', 'Cat3 is beer league'...........smdh

The pitfalls of being well informed.

Here's some "anecdata:" I know 6 riders who owned the bikes the OP is considering; they're all on Tarmacs now. One of those riders can get Canyons for free. A few of the others had "sponsorship" deals for the R3. Their needs, as expressed, were similar to the OPs. Maybe I'm reading too much into it, but Kgreene, you're interested in the Canyon and Cervelo because you're looking for a reasonably light, reasonably compliant, definitely race worthy, non-aero, pressfit-stiff-bb, all arounder?

And, azrider, I wouldn't suggest a CAAD or Evo because the headtubes are too short vis a vis the other bikes mentioned. Anyway, it's not like this is a cheese forum and we're telling the OP to try vegan pate instead.

[azrider]

Originally Posted by m4rk540

The pitfalls of being well informed.

Here's some "anecdata:" I know 6 riders who owned the bikes the OP is considering; they're all on Tarmacs now. One of those riders can get Canyons for free. A few of the others had "sponsorship" deals for the R3. Their needs, as expressed, were similar to the OPs. Maybe I'm reading too much into it, but Kgreene, you're interested in the Canyon and Cervelo because you're looking for a reasonably light, reasonably compliant, definitely race worthy, non-aero, pressfit-stiff-bb, all arounder?

And, azrider, I wouldn't suggest a CAAD or Evo because the headtubes are too short vis a vis the other bikes mentioned. Anyway, it's not like this is a cheese forum and we're telling the OP to try vegan pate instead.

The guy races Cat3....not like we're talking about beginner.

[benb]

I'd love to see a chart like that for a Trek Domane like mine.

The thing is, even with the ISOSpeed Decoupler, which will clearly let the saddle move an order of magnitude more than a traditional back end, you can still screw yourself up really good by going out with too much air in the rear tire.

I did so last friday, rode 100+ miles with too much air in the rear tire. I really paid for it, funky seat mast or not.

I think this whole conversation is semi-pointless. Whichever bike the OP wants that fits the best is the one to get. Everything else is pointless.

If you're going to win the race any race bike that fits is going to be good enough. The bike that fits the best will probably be the best bike.

There is probably no variance in geometry or design on any of these bikes that is going to effect race results at any level unless you compare a $1000 bike vs a $5000 bike or you compare a bike that is intended for racing vs one that is clearly not. (E.x. 25lb+ gravel/touring bike with big tires and really slack geometry.) The only way one of the bikes becomes substantially better than the others is if some of them don't fit and some do.

[echappist]

Originally Posted by ckorbey

Also, I wouldn't necessarily call Cat 3 "Beer League Racing"...

(sniffles quietly while rethinking life goals in a dark corner)

we certainly can't drink all the beer we'd like to drink if we want to stay competitive as cat-3s.

Originally Posted by kgreene10

I’m considering a new bike and would like to hear experiences with two Canyons (Ultimate SLX and SL) and the Cervelo R3. Rim brake versions. I’ll use them for racing Cat 3 and masters.

For those who know the Canyons, is the SLX worth the premium over the SL, in your opinion? I recognize that the SL can’t be had (or maybe just one model) in the US, but I’m in Spain at the moment.

out of curiosity, any reason for eschewing aero road bikes? I thought you were all into the aero stuff

[kgreene10]

Originally Posted by m4rk540

. Kgreene, you're interested in the Canyon and Cervelo because you're looking for a reasonably light, reasonably compliant, definitely race worthy, non-aero, pressfit-stiff-bb, all arounder?

. Anyway, it's not like this is a cheese forum and we're telling the OP to try vegan pate instead.

Well, I am lactose intolerant but vegan pate sounds horrible. Wait, will being lactose intolerant affect which bike I should get? Please discuss.

Yeah, the characteristics you mentioned are the ones I’m after. I’ve been racing on a Fisher Cronus road for years and it’s been better for me than one might expect. But it’s getting pebbled to death and clear coat is starting to come off.

We used to have a very generous Trek sponsorship and I briefly owned an Emonda SLR 9 but found the rear end hurt my lower back (first bike where that’s ever happened) and I wasn’t a fan of di2.

My sense is that the Cervelo and Canyons are likely more forgiving in the rear. The geo for the R3 will definitely work but not the new lower R5. The Canyon Ultimate may work but not the lower Aeroad. A Tarmac could work but it’s out of my price range - unless...anyone want a 2010 Fisher Cronus road in “perfect condition”? (Forget what I said above. Couldn’t be more pristine. Practically new “other”)!