"I find it quite hilarious that you have no idea what I do or what I earn, but appear to be claiming I can't afford that bike. As if thats why I hate it."

why else? your comments about the bike have gone from vitriolic to irrational. it's just a bike! it's not slow. it's not dangerous. it doesn't have an insidious secret agenda. it's just expensive.

i just don't understand what is behind all your hate. tell us. i'd like to understand. if you can make a cogent argument why you hate this bike so much - why it is such a threat to you - maybe i'll get it, and come over to your side.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

I think his point is simply that this is a gentleman's bike, and you sir, are no gentleman.

---

----
@adamwfurlong

"this is a gentleman's bike, and you sir, are no gentleman."

no argument there. happy to clear that up.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

This bike, at most, is a 5. Maybe drunk 6.

---

Internet User

Perhaps it's jealousy for those that are willing to spend the disposable income on such a purchase or perhaps it's frustration because everyone wanted/wants the next best thing, but can't afford it, or both. Seems like a lot of folks were waiting for the upgrade to the the P5 and now that the price has been raised everyone has their panties in a bunch.

I would be interested to know if there is any marketing or financial decisions in the pricing of the P5X in order to sell and push more sales for the P2, P3 and P5? Can't afford a P5X so I'll settle on a P5...etc.

My "hate" is mostly to balance the love affair others have for this bike - notably yourself (we just covered your personal interests), haycraft (an admitted cervelo apologist) and bryand (whos every other post discusses this being his next bike and the posts in between are him trying to rationalize with others why he should buy it). WHY DO THEY LOVE IT SO MUCH? I don't know. But I can "hate" it for the same no good reasons you or anyone loves it. There are other bikes I don't like - like the Ventum (actually for a lot of the same reasons I detail below). But ST doesn't wet themselves over it so no need to balance.

As our good friend Pubes has already pointed out, there are some things they've done very well. I don't need to rehash those.

But here's what I don't like:

1. Beauty is in the eye of the beer holder, or something. And I don't think any number of beers could make me appreciate this thing, visually, in any manner. It's ugly.
2. So I'm sure others will cry "form over function" or whatever. Fine. Point taken. But this isnt faster. They've made, at best, 20 grams savings over a P5 over an averaged sweep from 15 to -15. And the P5 is a hawt bike. I owned one. Why not make some design tweaks to the P5 to allow for integrated storage and call it a day? Shit. I'd buy that and about 4 others in my peer group would as well (we all share similar disdain for the P5x, btw).
3. They've pretended to solve for problems that none of us have by including disc brakes. And poorly executed disc brakes. Why? I don't know.
4. EVERYONE, including Cervelo and yourself, go on about how easy this bike is to break down and fly with. And I'm sure it's fine. But so are LOTS of other bikes. Maybe they don't have integrated suitcases used for storing on the go fluoride treatments. But there are many fast bikes that break down easily. It's just annoying to listen to people go on about this completely moot point.
5. Cervelo, of all brands, released this bike with no data. And not only that, its already available to purchase. That seems an odd shift for a brand with a long history of not only making fast bikes but proving they've made fast bikes with plentiful data. This bike was delayed for a year - you mean to tell me the data couldn't be ready to share at the time of release after being delayed for over a year? It all just smells fishy. Especially when you consider the first bits of data they released basically show no improvement over the P5. There are a lot of fast, smart people here who take issue with that, at this price point.
6. I think contracting two potential competitors to build your bike is a terrible decision - and also happens to be why it's $15k. This isn't Specialized using a faceless manufacturer in Taiwan. This is a Canadian company contracting already well respected american component manufacturers to build their bike. Which would require these companies to scale in ways they havent, using Cervelos money. Like, "hey, thanks Cervelo!".This market just got flooded with new bikes at a time when this sport is seeing a decline in participation. And then you're going to prop up two american companys who already hold the cachet needed in this space to be successful bike builders? All of it just seems so weird. And you punted the first time I directed it your way so I have to assume you agree, despite your ties to HED - since we're both into making assumptions about the other at this point.

I don't hate Cervelo, as you claim. I loved my P5. Loved my S5. I also love my S-Works Tarmac and Shiv, each with 9070 and eTap respectively - both outfitted with HED Jet Blacks (I also use Powertap P1s - if you care to know. Though mostly these bikes are, at best, sometimes ridden in my basement atop my Kickr.). I also love HED Jet Blacks. I REALLY REALLY enjoy spending senseless money on this sport that I don't even participate in at the moment.

I just don't like this bike. I'd apologize for hurting your feelings but thats weird. We are just talking about a bike aren't we?

---

"One Line Robert"

Ot I suppose people like me who were hoping for the next step up in speed and aerodynamic performance as opposed to a step up in other aspects which aren't as meaningful for me in my use case. And I'm not a Cervelo rider but I appreciate what they make and have think the P5 and the previous P4 were just incredible bikes. This one leaves me still underwhelmed.

---

-Of course it's 'effing hard, it's IRONMAN!
Team ZOOT
ZOOT, QR, Garmin, HED Wheels, Zealios, FormSwim, Precision Hydration, Rudy Project

It appears they're beyond the point of diminishing returns on the aero front, as this is two iterations in a row with marginal aero gains. Further gains will be small and costly to find and/or manufacture. They have to pivot; a new bike that shaves a handful of grams of drag but doesn't otherwise improve the user experience isn't enough to get somebody to replace their current model. Ergonomics improvements are new frontier. If they can make a bike more comfortable/handy ON TOP of shaving a few grams of drag, then its an easier sell.

---

"They're made of latex, not nitroglycerin"

Some of these folks really show their true character. I bet I can find plenty of stuff they have purchased that I would say they are a joke for wasting money like that.
But, when you allow folks to post without their real names, they think that can attack any company, product, person, you name it.

These same folks would argue the world is flat in the past.

---

Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep

Here is what I think. I personally believe that bike manufacturers have reached their limits in regards to aerodynamics of a bike in regards to just the bike. This is very clear with what has been released this past month.

Now they have to find the next "BIG" thing which is how does someone doing an Ironman with all of the crap they feel they have to carry. They really do not need to carry all this crap but they feel they do. In training you do have to carry that crap but there are already enough options out there to do this.

In training this would be a great bike to utilize but in a race I want a bike that is stripped down and more aero.

Does maximum aero matter that much in training anyway?

Why do you love them so much??

Aren't you late to a boxing lesson?

---

"One Line Robert"

I think you're looking this the wrong way. One of the places they can make incremental aero gains is by filling in some of the voids in the framespace. Then they use said space for storage because otherwise it's just boxed air.

---

"They're made of latex, not nitroglycerin"

" the love affair others have for this bike - notably yourself (we just covered your personal interests)"

i don't know why you think i love this bike. i wrote about this bike pretty dispassionately when i wrote about both the bike itself and the aerodynamics of it. this bike is a... bike. i love my wife. i love my dogs. this is just a bike, with pluses and minuses.

now, yes, i'm proud and pleased that the wife of one of my best friends has survived his death and has prevailed in life and in business to make this frame. i think that's a compelling story. but that's a separate story and that doesn't make this bike a better or worse bike. it's just a story i'm happy to tell.

i read the list of your complaints, and most of them i just don't see as factual or fair. they did not release this bike with no data. i can think of a LOT of problems discs solve. now, they create new ones i'll grant you. good discussion going forward.

as to the tactics of having enve and hed make sub-assemblies for cervelo's bike, i think it's a stroke of brilliance, you think it's just a stroke. agree to disagree.

i don't mind the discussion. i don't mind you having views different than mine. be pretty boring if we all thought the same way.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

I'm with you. I love my P5 but there are some things that are a PITA that I'd stupidly would've paid a lot of money to get an "upgraded" version. P5X ain't it.

Things that I would have loved to see Cervelo do to upgrade the P5-6:

1) integrated storage - there's more space in the triangle by the seat tube juncture, they could've easily had a stow box like the Canyon for a tube and a CO2. Crap maybe even two of each.
2) they never came up with their own "bento." Darkspeed works is fine, but not super elegant for the top tube.
3) What about the P4's water bottle?
4) brakes... good stopping power, but a pain to deal with.
5) maybe made it lighter - not sure if improvements to carbon would allow that but you can always hope.
6) the cockpit flexibility actually looks cool. too bad they affixed it to a beast.
7) the front brake covers aren't terribly elegant. Close the little gap.

I'd bet if they accomplished #1, #2, #3 and #6, they'd have produced a bike with more than 4-5 watts over the original P5. Throw in #5 and you've got a bike that I think is worth getting in trouble with my wife for buying.

Tyler Butterfield was given the option to switch bikes but chose not to. This is his set up for the race tomorrow on a P5, I guess he didn't get the 'fastest guys' memo!

---

Richard Melik | I work for the following companies | Zwift.com | Freespeed Bike Fit (UK)
Manager | David McNamee

I was waiting for someone to post that. The Pros make stupid decisions as well.

---

Make Inside Out Sports your next online tri shop! http://www.insideoutsports.com/

Just took the last post, to reply to this long thread.

"The P5X is here" nails it. The biggest deliverer for triathlon bikes shows a huge amount of work and made some statements ..

# it's hard to make equipment for tts more aero since the previous releases and it's still impossible to match with every situation
# significant improvement is possible in fit and functions
# beam bikes have small but at least advantages
# disc brakes can replace rim brakes

and that leads to something (not really) new

# the costumer has to make decisions for his wishes & needs that include deep insight in self image that is consequent for his huge investment

one part of business will never change, to pay attention can't be bought ..

The P5X as a fact affords to grow in decisions habits because now it's here ..

---

*
___/\___/\___/\___ the s u r f b o a r d of the K u r p f a l z is the r o a d b i k e .. oSo >>

Christ, are you still trying to justify your Powercranks?

Showed a picture of the P5X to the owner of my Swiss LBS. His first reaction was the same as what I've been thinking – this is the bike for the new breed of self-supported Trans-xxx bike races. Spare clothes etc all tucked away, decent brakes for the alpine descents and anything-may-happen weather. Anyone want to sponsor me one for a crack at the Transcontinental ;-)

I think that it is important for some people to have the "best" bike. The mere existence of a bike that makes their own ride appear to not be "top tier", (regardless of whether they are at a significant disadvantage in a race) offends them.

They are therefore angry at the very existence of that bike. The fact it is a Cervelo adds insult to injury!

They may even be a dentist! OMG!

If this bike was $9000, you would see a different tone on Slowtwitch. I've never seen so many people butthurt over a bike!

---

Make Inside Out Sports your next online tri shop! http://www.insideoutsports.com/

I'm actually a bit happy/relieved in a way. If it was a 15k bike that gave other racers a substantial advantage, THEN I would be a bit butt hurt.

I'm in the market for a new bike, now it looks like I can find something with comparable performance for a lot less money. That makes me happy.

A tricked out Cervelo P2 with some Flo wheels, Latex tubes and Conti with TriRig components and Sram Etap running 1 X 11 will be an extremely aero setup and leave money to have tunnel time and money for extra races.