Weight Weenies

FM066

Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓    Broad Selection ✓    Worldwide Delivery ✓

www.starbike.com

I'm in too "oversteer" : )... My Cervelo's ride is equal to or better than one of the industry's best steel bikes every built. PERIOD!

I heard a rumor, or maybe it was a confirmation from a guy who builds frames in the East Bay CA.
He says he went to a Cervelo builder forum or something rather and he was told the forks weren't engineered into the frame geometry.
It was hard to swallow that pill, but I respect this guy who's been in the cycling game for years and is one of the well known builders in the nor cal scene.
Maybe the earlier Cervelo frames were designed and the earlier 3T forks were just additions to the designs. Just a random rake on what they thought would work?
The bike just wouldn't turn in at all, and then a super sharp correction from your input after overshooting the turn. My buddy who rides for Rapha explained the exact same nature of her Cervelo R3 from that same era.
I had a Cervelo R3SL for reference. There's one popular climb I do in LA (Chantry), and I recall that Cervelo being damn scary on that descent. I overshot every single turn and I'm know to be a pretty damn good descender in my circle.

Just my take on the earlier Cervelo bikes. I went to a Parlee Z4 as my next bike and it was night and day on the exact same descent. Then from a Parlee to a Speedvagen and I was 2-4 seconds from KOM of that Chantry descent before it was removed from Strava and I sat up the entire top section...

I'm sure The newer Cervelo bikes are night and day better than their frames from 2007-2009.. That's 8 years of learning and making your frames and geometry better. That's like comparing a Parlee Z4 to their newest frames. Night and Day in terms of advancement.

2009 vibes!


The Parlee I rode right after the Oversteer King Cervelo R3SL.

Chantry descent is really really good for testing bike handling. Me and Ryan both use it.

@ Denavelo.....Does that really make sense?

Are you the number one selling tri bike in the world and the reason is that your engineering and aerodynamics are years ahead of any other manufacture. And on your second carbon road frame you build a bike that uses a "random rake or forks weren't engineered into the frame geometry". But at the same time you are sponsoring a pro team that is trying to win Paris–Roubaix where every pice of equipment is under a microscope and you have a possible TDF winner on your team?

Think of the liability..too ......I don't think so...

It's know that that Cervelo didn't build forks they never hid that..... They even said the R5Ca had a fork that was build by THM...... but there is just no way that Cervelo's forks weren't design with/for the frame.

C

Also Imo and others, the R3SL might be one of the best riding bikes ever built.

I'm going off of experience and what others have said. Cervelo wasn't started by (2) guys who raced on the pro tour circuit.
You can google and see people talking about the weird handling characteristics of the early Cervelo bikes.
Everyone started somewhere and they eventually progress as a brand. If there was no unison between 3T developing forks for Cervelo, then yes there could be an issue there.

I know 3 people who said the exact same thing about those year Cervelo. Their bikes have never been known as the best handling bikes, but some of the best climbing bikes (Light models).
I ride with frame builders who stress the importance of rake in their frame builds, or the bikes handle like CRAP. My buddy is a recipient of said bike. It climbs like a goat, but it twitchy and oversteers like a dog.
If the R3SL is such a pinnacle of handling, how come none of the current Cervelo bikes use the exact same geometry or fork rake or 3t fork from that generation? That would mean they improved on it, wouldn't it. Think about that.... 3T forks could have been the culprit and it was just a bad mix all together.

Maybe its because I started on and have ridden primarily Specialized/Cannondale geo which are super similar, but I have a current gen S3 and it took me a long time to get to grips with the handling. I still can descend faster on a Tarmac and am way more comfortable with the handling. I think part of it is the Cervelo geo is too short (reach), but even beyond that I have ridden a lot of other bikes that I was immediately confident on and still am not there with the S3.

Fuji SL

asiantrick wrote:I am lucky enough to ride most of the bikes on your list. One of the bike that is not on there and imo I feel stands slightly above the R5 would be the Argon Gallium Pro. As a current owner of the Izalco Max (stiff as a bogo stick) & previous owner of Super 6 Evo HM, R5, BH Ultra Light, Fuji. One bike that I regretted selling the most was the Gallium Pro.

I am coming off an Izalco and am shopping for something new - the Gallium Pro is one of the ones at the top of my list. How does it compare to the Izalco?

I am really happy with my new Carrera SL. You can find the frame for a good price.. and it looks even better than on the pics.

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=147518&p=1358957&hilit=carrera#p1358911

inspclouseau wrote:

asiantrick wrote:I am lucky enough to ride most of the bikes on your list. One of the bike that is not on there and imo I feel stands slightly above the R5 would be the Argon Gallium Pro. As a current owner of the Izalco Max (stiff as a bogo stick) & previous owner of Super 6 Evo HM, R5, BH Ultra Light, Fuji. One bike that I regretted selling the most was the Gallium Pro.

I am coming off an Izalco and am shopping for something new - the Gallium Pro is one of the ones at the top of my list. How does it compare to the Izalco?

More comfortable and more agile than the Izalco. But after I rode the Addict SL (current bike) I put the Addict SL above both of those bikes in term of comfort, agility, & speed. You really can't go wrong with those 3 bikes though.

Cervelo R5
Fuji SL
Focus Izalco
Scott Addict SL (older model, buy it used)

As long as the geometry works, you can't do wrong with any of those options.

In the end I got a SuperSix EVO HiMod, 2016 model and I love it Stock for now, but things to come for next season... SRAM Red, AX Lightness and the like...

I also got a Focus Izalco Disc and I have a slight nudging that it might be even better uphill than the Cannondale... will ride the Cannondale again in the spring, then I will be able to tell.

asiantrick wrote:

inspclouseau wrote:

asiantrick wrote:I am lucky enough to ride most of the bikes on your list. One of the bike that is not on there and imo I feel stands slightly above the R5 would be the Argon Gallium Pro. As a current owner of the Izalco Max (stiff as a bogo stick) & previous owner of Super 6 Evo HM, R5, BH Ultra Light, Fuji. One bike that I regretted selling the most was the Gallium Pro.

I am coming off an Izalco and am shopping for something new - the Gallium Pro is one of the ones at the top of my list. How does it compare to the Izalco?

More comfortable and more agile than the Izalco. But after I rode the Addict SL (current bike) I put the Addict SL above both of those bikes in term of comfort, agility, & speed. You really can't go wrong with those 3 bikes though.

One of the things I loved about my izalco was how comfortable and fun it was. This is good to know. Thanks for the info!

Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓    Broad Selection ✓    Worldwide Delivery ✓

www.starbike.com

One of the things I loved about my izalco was how comfortable and fun it was. This is good to know. Thanks for the info!

I'm surprise that you think the Izalco is comfortable. It's a bit way to stiff for my taste. It's still my go to bike when I know I will go down on a sketchy descend, since it handles like I'm on rail.