Hello all,

Currently searching for a new ride and have narrowed it down to the above bikes. Both seem like great bikes. I rode the R3 sl last year and really liked it but have not ridden the Z5 or the R5. I know these things always tend to be subjective but I would value input from someone who has ridden both or has knowledge of the exact weight of either. Thanks in advance.

Very good question, I wondered the same question myself and now I own both so here is my rundown.. Both bikes can be set up with the exact same body position with setback seatposts, my r5 is a 51 and my parlee z5 sl ltd is a small with a tall headtube. The nice thing about the parlee is that I can run no spacers above the headtube with a 90cm -7 degree stem and short reach handlebars. The R5 is setup with 2cm plus the top cap under it worth of spacers with a 90mm -6 degree stem and the same handlebars. As far as weight goes, the z5sl bare frame is about 40 grams lighter. Fit and finish wise the Parlee wins hands down, it just looks like an expensive bike.. The r5 is nicer in finish than the previous r3sl, but not as nice as the parlee. Ride quality is similar in scope with a few differences. The parlee is more compliant on all types of riding and still stiff out of the saddle. The r5 seems more connected to the road (not a bad feeling in my book), but more compliant than the previous r3sl.

Surprisingly, even though the parlee has a longer wheelbase and less fork rake, it takes the tight turns with more confidince and decends with more stability. I do not notice a difference in climbing performance between the parlee z5 and the r5. I will give Cervelo props, the 2011 r5 handles much better than the r3sl, the squirrely feeling is gone.

Overall Snappiness and pure acceleration goes to the r5, but not by much... I can't tell if I am actually accelerating faster or just [i]feel[i] like I am accelerating faster because more road feel with the r5. Another thing that may be throwing me off is that I have a speed sensor and magnet on my garmin 800 on the r5 with the wheel calibrated to size, while I use the gps speed tracking on my parlee beacause my cadence is calculated by my powermeter. The Cervelo probably has a slight edge on lateral stiffness, but yet again I can't really tell.

Basically, I am torn between the two and if I was forced to sell one, I am not sure which one I would. I like the parlee z5 because it allows me to run a cannondale hollowgram and not limited to the rotor 3d+ which is stiff, but not as stiff as the cannondale si sl or my old dura ace 7900 crank. Probably the best overal bike for someone who wants a completely balanced bike is the parlee and for the full out racer would be the r5. Sorry if I wasn't much help as I would be happy riding either bike at any given time. I do think my parlee z5 sl looks cooler because of the all black setup, ee brakes, and lightweight wheels.

Great info. I am leaning towards the parlee as it sounds like it fits my needs a bit better. Plus I do really like the all black stealth look with a dash of color.

Thanks

Cervelo provides BB adapters to run nearly any crank on BBRight, so you are not limited to only the Rotor crank...or did I misread your statement?
EM3

The cannondale hollowgram will not fit on the cervelo bbright because the spindle is 11mm shorter. You would need a custom length spindle to use that crank on the r5. The rotor bb+ crank works on BB30 frames because it has the longer spinder and includes spacers to take up the slack on bb30 fames.

I have owned a small Z5, R3SL 51cm and an R5 51cm. I found that the top tube on the Z5 was longer once you adjusted for the seatpost angle. I was also forced to use a heavier seatpost with more setback on the Z5 because of the seatpost angle. So the weight difference was pretty small between all of them. I actually liked the twitchier R3-SL handling once I got use to it, but this winter I rode the R5. Sold my Z5 to a friend that liked the longer top tube.

I also liked the twitchy feeling of the r3sl, unless I was going 35+ downhill... Are you sure the top tube is longer? I set the bars the same height with the same bars, same stem, and same seatpost and setback relative to the bottom bracket, the distance from the tip of the saddle to the center of the handlebar is exactly the same for me.

What does it mean when people say that the bike is "twitchy"? Is that good or bad for handling?

_________________
2010 Pinarello Dogma 60.1

The bike jumps to the direction the handlebar turns with the slightest movement. Good for a quick breakaway from the group, bad for a 40+ mile descent, you better be paying attention!

I came down to the exact same two bikes when I was deciding which road bike to purchase last month. I took the R3 and Z5 (R5/SL not available - feel & fit should be the same in both cases) for extended test rides. I definitely can't claim to be able to tell which is more laterally stiff. I could tell, however, that the Z5's ride was a bit more compliant. I'd call this "slightly less road vibration and slightly more connected to the road by virtue of less wheel chatter." This was really on the margin though, and could easily have been a tire pressure thing, so I wouldn't put too much weight there.

I loved the technology positioning of the R5. Didn't love the R5 paint (not a fan of green or yellow accents). With components, you can make each weigh the same as the other, so that's essentially mute.

The decision for me came down to fit. I've got relatively long legs and a short reach, so to make the R5 fit me I would have needed a 51 with a bunch of spacers and maybe even a +6 stem. On the Small/Tall Z5 I can get away with few spacers and a -6 stem, plus have more room to play with the fit than I would have had on the R5. Also, getting a BB30 just gives you more options than BBright at this point - in this case, I've put a Quarq on the Z5, which you can't yet get on an R5.

Net: loved them both. I agree with the person who said the R5 may be the better hardcore race bike. Ultimately, fit made the decision for me.

Jesus

What a well thought out post and reasoning for buying one bike over the other. Welcome to the board...... 9/10 we'd see this post degenerate into carbon this and that Tour mag quotes. Fit normally takes a back set. Kuddos.

Starnut

_________________
"Don't pedal harder, pedal faster!"
Q-FACTOR IS A RED HERRING

BB30.COM

That isn't surprising to me. Less fork rake tends to give more stability if the head angle is the same (yes there are more factors, but in general this is the case).

Considering you take a turn with decent speed you do not need a twitchy bike as the actually cornering angle will be small. (If a corner does or doesn't feel tight depends a lot on the speed you have^^)

I prefer more stability as I never felt the need for twitchy steering, especially not in the peleton. A bike that prefers to go straight ahead is very nice if you get jostled . But there are others who just as much prefer the twitchy feeling, so my opinion is as good as anyones

Today I paid the deposit on a Z5 SL. I'm moving to carbon - my first carbon frame - from a Seven Odonata which is 11 years old and which will become the world's most extravagant winter training bike.

I made the decision to go for carbon on the basis of weight and compliance, plus the more organic shapes we're seeing in carbon frames these days looking and feeling more modern, more tuned and better able to handle my own particular needs, which are three in number: (1) comfort for 6+ hours in the saddle at decent speeds on 160km+ sportives including silver/gold time attempts at the Etape, Marmotte, Dragon etc.; (2) the ability to make me feel like a racer, even if I'm not one; and (3) general usability and longevity because at 46 my remaining cycling life is likely to be too short to warrant another purchase of this magnitude.

I made the decision to buy the Z5 on the basis of fit and its ability to deliver the above needs in spades but also, if I'm honest, for its understated cool. I did not want to bling it up; it's just not that sort of frame. Save the AX Lightness bits for the Storck. Just put me down for some bog standard Dura-Ace with Hollowgram for kicks, and that's enough. I rode the R3 SL (not the R5, admittedly) and I rode the Tarmac, the S-Works Roubaix, the Madone, the Fascenario, the Dogma. All are excellent quality, as they should be for £3-4K for the frame. But none had the overall positive effect on my confidence, my self-image, my motivation to ride, as the 6400g-when-built Parlee.

Of course I haven't taken delivery yet, but somehow I just know that this is the right bike for me. Bling it ain't; but I'm going to leave the Team Sky replicas, the C-59ers, even the R3 and R5 riders in my club, behind me as I head for the hills...

Congratulations, I'm sure you will be happy with your choice. I got my Parlee in Dec and have done nearly 3000km on it.
The Z5 climbs with ease, has razor sharp handling and descends like no other bike I have ridden. To top it off, it is comfortable on long rides.
My Z5 keeps amazing me as I keep pushing the limits and not finding them yet.
The build quality is exceptional and finish is top class.
Hope you enjoy yor Z5 as much as I enjoy mine.

_________________
Ozrider - Western Australia
Parlee Z5 XL 2011 (6055g/13.32lbs) Raleigh RC Ltd 2008 (7.6kg) Reynolds 653 Custom 1990 (9.8kg, now 8.8kg)
The accumulation of marginal gains is what makes the difference between winning and losing

x2. I love my Z5. Love, love, love. It's a race bike that's just as comfortable to ride 100+ miles.

Also love the flexfit option - I'm long legged, short torso and the Large(TALL) works great for me.

Just ordered the Parlee TT bike as well. Should be here in a few weeks.