I had a custom built Guru and I loved the bike. I also have long legs and a short torso. The bike was a great fit for me. I had it built at the end of the 2007 season. I just sold it last month. The only reason I sold it is b/c I have not done a tri since 2008 and we were moving. I would still have the bike if I was still doing tris!

I have a 2008 Guru Crono and I really love the bike. Mine developed a crack in the seat clamp and in 2010 was sent back to Montreal and the built me a new bike. While it is not the most aero, I do like the style and was able to get a great paint scheme. So many bikes are bland and boring. I would love to get a newer model, but I am getting older and slower and don't see any time gains in my future.

I did pick up a stock geometry Guru Magis for my wife on eBay for $500 and a Carbonio/TI for me for $400. Then built them up for winter projects.

I get lots of compliments on my bike and other Guru riders appreciate the brand.

Is it worth getting custom - yes, if you have a weird body issue that stock bikes can't fit, but I am guessing a good fitter can get you close.

Hey!
Honestly? I have no idea about guru bikes, never seen one in public. I accidently found ribblecycles, a company based in the UK. I have no idea of quality and materials of them either, but they offer a good bike building and many many different varieties for an awesome price.
If you don't want to go custom with Treks Project one probably try to find Stevens and their Super Trofeo, they offer a good custom service in my opinion!

Regards and best of luck
Nick ;)

---

sent from my iPhone

If you need it fit wise sure, but that would be few and far between on the periphery of very odd body morphology. I kept trying to keep my buddy from shelling out that much money by educating him on stack and reach, but in the end the LBS salesman was just too good. After he got his bike built I showed him with stack and reach if he'd of been willing to run a 10mm difference in stem and 1.5cm of spacers he could have ridden a Slice. He about cried.

But if you are one of those who just can't fit on the array of stock frames with some spacer and stem adjustment sure it would be money well spent. Or if you just want one nothing wrong with that either. That said the Guru fit him great and he loved it, but he learned the hard way he didn't *need* custom. He's currently on that Slice he had wanted with the same fit replicated.

Slowman has put an amazingly powerful tool at our disposal with stack and reach tutorials. I know it might look daunting, but trust me if I can understand it anyone can. It's a skill set that will serve you well the rest of your triathlon career with self-help fit tweaks, cockpit swaps etc. It's awesomeness.

THIS!

If one is an outlier and truly needs a custom frame then by all means go with the Guru. That's a very, very small percentage of riders though. Or if you really want one for some odd reason that more than likely defies any and all logic, then also feel free.

For the 98% of us that don't need a custom frame, I see zero reason to go with a Guru. A custom 901 is $5,000. A stock one is over $4,000. A 701 is over $4,000. Those frames are at best a couple of generations behind the superbikes from the usual suspects (Trek, Cervelo, Specialized, Felt, BMC). So why on earth would anyone pay superbike prices for an average and outdated frame? That's what I can never wrap my head around when it comes to Guru.

---

Favorite Gear: Dimond | Cadex | Desoto Sport | Hoka One One

I bought a Crono in 2007 (or possibly 2008, I can't remember) when fit was absolutely my prime directive. I was coming off a road-bike with clamp ons and was so tired of a sore back and just being uncomfortable in the aero position that I decided that was the number one priority. I don't doubt that I could have been fit on a stock frame of some manufacturer. To the fitter's credit, he did at least attempt to steer me to a less expensive and more aero frame. But when I asked him flat-out, "On which of these frames will I be most comfortable for 5 hours?" he did not hesitate to say Guru. And it was perfect from the first time I got on it until now.

But that was then. If I were getting a a tri bike now, I would probably take my current Guru measurements and get something more aero. Not a Cervelo (mostly because I just can't stand the sight of them) but something else. There are many more choices now with better geometry, more aero models.

I don't regret my purchase. The bike gave me exactly what I asked for. But I can't see buying a Guru tri bike now. They need to catch up in the aerodynamics deptartment

I will never forget racing Timberman 70.3 one year and climbing the one hill on the way out and seeing a guy walking his Cervelo P5 with full disc. I asked if he was ok....he said hill was too tough for him...I laughed to myself that he spent $5,000+ on a super bike and couldn't climb. All in the marketing. I was looking at "downgrading" my ride to a new P2 and starting fresh, but my wife told me I was a sell out and my bike looked so much better and that I should work on my engine if I want to go faster. She did say I could by a Stihl trimmer for the lawn!

I bought a Guru early last year and it did not work out well at all. After a few races where I was losing the bike leg to other racers whom I normally beat, I switched back to my older bike for the remainder of the season (and my results reverted to what they had been previously.) The Guru has proved to be more comfortable at the end of a long 3-4 hour ride, but it is definitely less aero and as a result, slower. (For me, I estimate the difference at around 2%). I think that the conclusions that others have posted above are accurate. If you are unable to find a fit on another brand, get the Guru, but realize that you are getting a bike that is one or two generations behind the others.

Here we go again with the Guru is not aero. The Guru frame is very aero, I can assure you. I can also guarantee I can kick ass on a road frame with my aero setup too, the frame means that little at the speeds were are talking here.

To compare two bike setups tape a dowel to a door frame and like a limbo dance, ride under the bar to see which bike is lower. This exercise has a direct relationship to aero pad placement - height and frontal area.

Anyway the Guru rides like a dream. The bike just hovers over the road, even rough stuff. I've been bombing around Kitsilano (Vancouver) this week and will be out on the CR901 again this weekend. It's the best responding frame I've ridden to date. Light, smooth, oozes quality and FAST!

Here's my stable of comparos
Argon E118
Argon E80
Javelin Asti
Devinci T2
Pinarello FP

---

Training Tweets: https://twitter.com/Jagersport_com
FM Sports: http://fluidmotionsports.com

There are levels of aero. Sure the Guru is aerodynamically superior to many bikes, unfortunately none of the bikes in a similar price range.

---

Favorite Gear: Dimond | Cadex | Desoto Sport | Hoka One One

I'll give some examples, why the statements regarding aero are misguided and are irrelevant in this context.

You could take a generic decent quality aero frame, with good bars and wheels and compete at the highest level for the hour record. This is at 50 km/h

Tour Pros ride bikes that are by the definition here "5 generations behind" in aero tech. Scan the photos for TDF TT bikes and you'll see a lot of standard industry setups - no hidden/bottom mounted brakes, no integrated (PIA) stem systems, no proprietary bars etc. All sorts of brands of wheels. This again is competing roughly at 50 km/h

Now we have an athlete who is riding at much less km/h and is to fret about a Guru frame not aero enough? Priority in the wrong place. How about we talk 1. fit/adjustment ability 2. bike handling & ride 3. ease of maint 4. overall performance (bike to run). - while still being aero.

This morning on the way to PT appt in kits here, I passed a guy riding on a GURU CR901. Looked amazing. A rare occurrence - didn't have time to talk. Then I stopped in at Westpoint Multisport and took a look at the bike & saddle fitting system they had. They had a guy on the stand setting up his road bike with aero bars for a 70.3. Of course some major surgery was going on, but this guy will get a good ride. Getting fitted first, using an asset he has in stock, priorities in the right place.

I might just book my own session :)

---

Training Tweets: https://twitter.com/Jagersport_com
FM Sports: http://fluidmotionsports.com

How does Guru outperform a Cervelo NP2 in any of those categories?

if you need a custom frame, the Guru is a good price and they can build it fairly quickly. I had a cyclocross bike built up and they were able to add some of the stuff I wanted like a chain holder and pump peg.

If I were getting a custom bike, I'd get a press in headset (and press in a campy or chris king) and screw in BB (and screw in a phil wood) along with a pump peg so I can train with a real pump.

The Guru is a nice way to solve your fit problems if you need it. Another affordable option is the Rock Lobster

I comment on discussions regarding the Guru because a year ago I had read some of the arguments against the Guru, ignored them, and ended up with a bad result. Going forward I will just state that my Guru has proved to be slower than my older Cervelo P2 without blaming it on aerodynamics.

When these discussions come up I look back at my data to make certain that my memory is not overstating the difference between my two bikes. Here is good example of why I ditched the Guru for my races. There were 26 people (other than myself) who raced in both the 2013 Sprint Nationals and 2014 Duathlon Standard Nationals. Their average bike time for the Sprint race was 35:24 and for the Duathlon 57:23. My times were 31:50 (89.9% of the average) on the P2 and 53:28 (93.2% of the average) on the Guru so I slowed by about 3% and there were 5 people that I beat on the bike leg in Milwaukee that beat me in St. Paul.

This reversed for the 2014 Sprint Nationals where I switched back to using my Cervelo. My relation to the averages was again 93.2% on the Guru and 91.4% on the Cervelo so about a 2% difference and there were 2 people that I lost to in St. Paul that I beat in Milwaukee in 2014.

The same was true for my local races last year though there were less common racers so the data is less robust.

This is true, if you ignore all the evidence to the contrary. Notice the bikes many of the top riders are on, they have all the pieces that you mentioned. Of course especially during the tour there are some riders that do not care at all about the TT, they just want to meet the cut off. Also, some sponsors simply do not have good TT bikes, but every year that is less and less true. By my count probably 12 of the 17 teams have very good bikes, compared to 10 of 18 last year.

I do notice that no rider is on a Guru, so obviously by your criteria nobody should ride a Guru.

I have an stock Guru CR301 TT bike and its great.
I also have a custom Marinoni road bike , and of course it fits me like glove.
You'll probably not regret getting a custom frame.

---

res, non verba

You mentioned: "train with, take to ITU Worlds, 70.3"

However, after this year ITU worlds will be draft legal and a TT bike will have no place in that type of race.

Just an FYI

I believe only sprint distance will be draft legal, where have you heard that all will be?

My criteria is a to have a mind of your own, and assess the facts, which are:
- the air gets split by the front wheel
-after it threads past the fork and bars, the flow in simple terms just slams into the rider
-after that it's all a turbulent gong show. Which is the reason the actual frame itself is way less important than it looks, and pros use regular water bottles etc.

e.g. How did Lionel be so fast on an Louis Garneau?? (LG makes good stuff btw) The reason why LS is fast on an LG is that LS is fast, and the LG well it's not too shabby a bike, but it doesn't need to be anything outrageous, just good enough to put him in position and hold the crank & wheels.

I'd hate to be a cycling aerodynamics engineer, because there is really nothing there to speak of, part time job at best. In my "hyper-bike" spec thread, I did outline some tangibles, which is to work on the bike as an automated and dynamic system of both rider and machine. To use automated systems to adapt the bike during the race course - in other words work directly on the 100% vs the <5% (frame).

OK back to Guru - the reason I bought the frame in the first place, is that I know people who build carbon parts in Europe and in the USA. I've built carbon parts too by hand layup. The raw materials and construction process did make a difference in performance and feel. So I wanted a frame made here vs China, that simple. And when I looked into Guru I was impressed by the engineering, process and customer feedback on their frames. Called them up, got a frame on order in some cool colors (blue).

I have to say that yes, it is true, the bike rides great, accelerates like a rocket, turns like a beast and feels amazing to ride. It looks fantastic too. Just this past week, I,ve had comments every time I've brought it out. It looks way better in real life vs pix. Now is it "better" than a P2 or ?? I couldn't answer that question.

I did want a bike I could ride for an afternoon without needing to take my tool kit with me. and have the family follow me in the support car, with a backup bike just in case.

---

Training Tweets: https://twitter.com/Jagersport_com
FM Sports: http://fluidmotionsports.com

Setting aside both the aero and custom frame arguments, have you seen a professional bike fitter? It sounds like you have some very specific body issues to deal with when sitting on a bike. I assume you're asking about a custom Guru because you are not happy with how you fit on the Scott. I'd suggest finding a very experienced triathlon bike fitter and letting them evaluate your needs. Your best bet would be to find a fitter that is brand neutral, but with the cost of fit systems this may not be possible.

A fitter would certainly give a good starting or mid-point. Here is some info on the 901 from a few years ago...

< https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z3JUcVxA2dA

---

Training Tweets: https://twitter.com/Jagersport_com
FM Sports: http://fluidmotionsports.com

You are right: only the sprint. There was some slow twitch chatter a few months back about how I believe chicago will be the last non draft sprint worlds. I believe next years USA nationals may be draft legal w Mexico and the Netherlands (2016, 2017) being d legal in the sprint.