Is it time for me to buy a new bike?

[cervelo-van]

Ok, first some quick history to those who did not read the intro.

I am 53, a long time distance runner, but haven't been able to run seriously for a few years now. Very little biking since I was 13. In July 2008 I decided to take up biking as I have been unable to run like I used to. Got the Cervelo Soloist Team which I liked but sold after 2 weeks to buy the Cervelo RS which I love. Added DT Swiss RR1450 wheels. Also purchased a Scott CX Team Cross Bike for Winter riding.

I do rides of between 50-65K on the weekends (Saturday and Sunday) and when the weather is good, about 20K or so on weekdays after work. I don't plan to race bikes, though you never know. I am considering Triathlon, kind of a mid-life goal thing.

So, I get itchy fingers regarding bikes and thinking if I should add another high-end bike, or sell the RS and get something else. People have suggested Colango (EP) or Merckx EXM, but from what I read, Cervelos are still the best. I'm thinking of the R3. At the LBS where I shop, many of the store employees on the Sunday rides have R3.

So, what do you good folks think? Am I wasting my money replacing the RS with the R3?

[chase196126]

Personally I love the R3's I have (team issued 2008 R3 and personal R3-Sl) so i doubt you would be disapointed with the bike if you got it. Will you notice a huge difference between the R3 and RS? Probably not, which might be a little disapointing.

My advice would be to go and try a bunch of different bikes. Find one that really makes you smile and get it if you have the itch. Try something other than the Cervelos especially. They are great bikes but if it is a different ride feel that you want check out some other brands first.

[cervelo-van]

Yes, this is what others have said too. Quick question, since you have both the R3 and R3SL. What are the things you like with one over the other.

For me, without having ridden either of them, I prefer the Black to the white, but the SL is more expensive.

Thanks

Personally I love the R3's I have (team issued 2008 R3 and personal R3-Sl) so i doubt you would be disapointed with the bike if you got it. Will you notice a huge difference between the R3 and RS? Probably not, which might be a little disapointing.

My advice would be to go and try a bunch of different bikes. Find one that really makes you smile and get it if you have the itch. Try something other than the Cervelos especially. They are great bikes but if it is a different ride feel that you want check out some other brands first.

[c50jim]

Since I do own both an RS and an R3, I'll chip in again. I'm a little older than you at 59 but have ridden over 10,000 km per year for at least 10 years and 13-15,000 in each of the last three years since I entered semi-retirement. I did triathlons pretty seriously for about 10 years but quit that about 15 years ago. I'm also a bike shop's dream - in fact, my local LBS introduced me to a friend as his best customer. Since I used to buy 2-3 bikes per year from him (my younger son was on the national team for a while and my wife and older son also ride so not all the bikes were for me), that was probably accurate. Almost all these bikes were fairly high end road bikes - the RS is the cheapest bike I've bought in years.

Cycling is a great sport and a lot of fun. It's also addicting to some, including me, to test out all the new equipment. That can create problems since we ride with someone who talks up their great bike and we like the finish, the colour or some of the components enough to think of changing our current ride even though we like it.

I think you should keep a couple of things about the bike market in mind as you consider a new bike. Sales people are usually well under 40 (chase196126 sounds like he is too since he has a team issued bike). Most are either current or former racers who put out a lot of peak power and some can put out high continuous power rates as well. The racing bikes you can buy in your local shop are pretty close, or even identical, to the bikes that 25-35 year old pros who just want to win races ride in the Pro Tour. That means they sacrifice ride for precise handling and direct power transfer. I find that most race bikes feel skittish since their bottom bracket/rear triangle is so stiff. The bias of many sales people is towards these race bikes because they personally want the characteristics those bikes provide. On the other hand, there are some fine bikes that racers make fun of that are more oriented towards older riders who just want to have fun on the bike. For example, there's seldom a good word said on this site about Serotta, which caters to the doctor/lawyer/investment banker set.

So, how does all that rant relate to the R3 and RS? In truth, these bikes are VERY different. The R3 is a modern race bike. It's a great tool for a pro but its ride is much rougher than the RS and its handling is, in my opinion, much less forgiving. My regular R3 was less than 100 grams lighter than my RS so it isn't even much lighter. Yes, this is weight weenies but my 1060 gram size 58 Cervelo is about 300 grams lighter than my C50, another bike you mentioned, and is still pretty light. I suspect the R3SL will ride more like the R3 than the RS since it shares the R3's geometry. Compared to the other recent race bikes I've ridden (C50, Soloist carbon, Look 585), I'd rate the R3 the second most uncompromising race machine, next to the SC, which even my son thought was too much. I wanted to try the R3 and got a great deal on it and a Record 10 speed group so I picked it up, thinking it will probably get passed on to my son in a year or so, or when his Look bites the dust as racers' bikes seem to do. In fact, I've only ridden it a couple of times and he can have it now. I'm already thinking what frame I'll put the parts on - perhaps a Crumpton.

What I'm really trying to convey to you is that you need to understand what characteristics you want from a bike and find the one that best satisfies your needs. Even at 53, you may be brimming with power and like the feel of a flat out race bike - the cycling equivalent of a Ferrari Cup 430, not a stock 430. For 50-65 km rides, the stiffer ride won't be a problem and the R3 will be a little more responsive. On the other hand, based on the way your RS is set up - pretty high bar relative to seat ratio - I suspect you may find you like the type of bike the RS represents. Although some shops claim that you can't tell anything from a test ride, sometimes it's pretty easy to tell that a bike isn't for you within 30 minutes. If you're making a change to a full on race bike - R3, S3, 595, EP, EPS, etc., you should definitely try something in that class to see if it's what you want.

As I said in an earlier post, the EP is a race Colnago and you should also consider the EC or a regular C50. The new Merckx looks interesting but few stores in Canada seem to want to deal with GITA so I don't know how easily you'll find one in Vancouver. I still think the Parlee Z4 is a great compromise - light, good handling and a more supple ride than an R3. Others will chip in with their favourites and you should try as many as you can but make your choice based on what you like, not what I, or anyone else, say.

[cervelo-van]

First, thanks for an awesome post and for taking the time to write a very detailed, based on extensive personal experience post. It is also a very logical one.

I agree that you are right. First I need to get a few seasons of riding under my belt before thinking of the next step.

So, sticking with the RS for now.

Thanks all.


[quote="c50jim"]Since I do own both an RS and an R3, I'll chip in again. I'm a little older than you at 59 but have ridden over 10,000 km per year for at least 10 years and 13-15,000 in each of the last three years since I entered semi-retirement. I did triathlons pretty seriously for about 10

[zebragonzo]

Figure out what you want from a bike and then choose a bike based on those parameters.