Thank you for size 45!
The geometry for this size looks ideal.

Now, when will this size be available?

Since when is $5,400 "within reach"?

I believe in one of the threads it said that some sizes were already shipping. Someone from a shop said they had a customer order one and it will be in by the end of the week. I don't remember the size though.

Shane

well let us do some math.
a regular 10 speed dura ace adds $1,500 to the price of the old p3 frameset.

11 speed dura ace + magura hydraulic road brakes. probably more expensive than that. So a new p3 frame may cost ~$3,400

I would have gotten the new model rolling with more utilitarian components like 105-Rival-Ultegra range. It's like rolling out a new VW Jetta Model and beefing it up to the hilt and basically putting it up with the Audi A4.

Cervelo's strategy is probably based on these two reasons:

1. Sell the bikes with the highest profit margins first, and I'm guessing in this instance it's the high end models. There are likely only a few frames in each size in the short term, might as well hang the highest profit on each one.
2. Prevent canibalizing P5 sales. If you can get 90% of the P5's performance for half the price, why would you bother purchasing the P5?

I think you already get 90% (or more) of the performance of the P5 at half the price with the old P3

If you can get 90% of the P5's performance for half the price, why would you bother purchasing the P5?

When will we see the Fuji thread? Sort of, kind of interested in what they're doing.

Anybody else feel like the new �p3� looks more like the p2 than the old p3? Where is the curve for the rear wheel?.

They might has well have just ran the rear brake all the way along the top tube. Seriously, WTH were they thinking there?

The new p3, equalizing for aerobars equipped on it, is within like 5-10 grams of the p5. Which makes it about as good or better than any superbike on the market depending on your yaw angle histogram.

Riiiiiight. Because entering the frame behind the headset with the derailluer cables and exiting anywhere further back than that ungodly loop of cable hanging there in front of the seat tube would not have been more aero? But having a straw sticking up out of a bottle vs. a BTA mount costs you how many watts?

I really like the fact that the frame has a number of aero advantages, but remains easy to work on and more importantly easy to pack. After recently building a Shiv and spending hours on the aero-bars and getting the brakes set up I can tell you I have zero interest in every traveling with that bike. To have to disassemble the bars to pack into a box makes me frustrated just thinking about it.

I think they have done a great job improving the frame yet retaining the ability to choose whatever aero-bar the rider likes best.

Can someone explain how/(if) the geometery has shifted from the old p3 to this one?

Not aimed at Dev...but his post peaked my curiosity -
I have a P3SL currently, but the bike prior was a 2003 P2k and it fit great (better than the SL).
I tried to look up the stack & reach for the P2k and the geometry table did not list them.
Anyone know how the 3 compare?
I will be 'really' interested in the new P3 if it fits like the P2k.

wow... those are pretty massive changes. This is exactly how I felt when Ford redesigned the focus. I never thought I'd say, "Damn, that Ford Focus is sick." Well... I never thought I'd say this either. I might fit a P3 perfectly.

I was thinking about this a lot last night... What makes any of us feel entitled to an "affordable" bike that's designed for performance at the top end of the sport?

What's more, why do so many of us seem to think that we're being inconvenienced when we look at a bike and scream "Those stack and reach numbers are AT LEAST a centimeter too long/short/high/low!"?

For decades, professionals rode heavy, flexy bikes with quill stems and "sub-obtimal" geometry -- and they did it faster than any of us can dream. Now, companies like 3T make their money on offering stems and bars that can get 99% of people to "fit" on any size bike (within reason) -- yet we don't cry that their stems only come in 100, 110, and 120 instead of those necessary in-betweens like 105, 113 and 118 to REALLY get us dialed.

Where's the line? We all make choices. Dev mentioned a high-spec VW vs an Audi. I'd argue that 99% of us only need a Honda Accord. You know why? Because we are not professional drivers. Should we start begging auto manufacturers to measure our arms and legs and install the driver's seat and steering wheel so that we no longer need adjustability? No. Like bikes, adjustability (and resale value) are king.

If any manufacturer put everything that every consumer wanted into its product, we couldn't afford to buy it, because they couldn't afford to produce it, and they go out of business. Then we're back to start-up companies that offer a utilitarian product designed to fit the masses. That's the way it's always worked, and I predict that within our own competitive lifetimes, that's not going to change in regard to bike production.

/rant.

By the way, tgarson, that wasn't directed at you -- just my thoughts on the situation in general :) I'll shut up and go ride my P2 now....

Thank you for size 45!
The geometry for this size looks ideal.

Now, when will this size be available?

[..] what was wrong with the old external BB cups?

Basically your saddle and bar height drop equal to the change in BB drop. So for two otherwise identical bikes (head tube height, etc.) except one with more bb drop and one with less, the higher bb drop will have a higher and the lower bb drop will have lower stack, respectively.


Decreases pedal clearance when pedaling through a corner (should NOT be an issue with non-fixed gear bikes), lowers your center of gravity by the amount of change. The lower cg is probably beneficial for handling, although in the millimeter amounts we're talking about, I'm not sure how much that *really* changes things. It also functionally shortens the chain line (VERY VERY MINOR)

In short: increasing BB drop is a good way to increase the stack of a bike without affecting the headtube length.

In short: increasing BB drop is a good way to increase the stack of a bike without affecting the headtube length.

I would just like to add that Cervelo has clearly made a goof on the naming of their new bike (as well as all of the publications covering the bike). It seems their calling it a P3. Its actually a P5-1.

Just though I'd help everyone sort out any confusion.

I was thinking about this a lot last night... What makes any of us feel entitled to an "affordable" bike that's designed for performance at the top end of the sport?

What's more, why do so many of us seem to think that we're being inconvenienced when we look at a bike and scream "Those stack and reach numbers are AT LEAST a centimeter too long/short/high/low!"?

For decades, professionals rode heavy, flexy bikes with quill stems and "sub-obtimal" geometry -- and they did it faster than any of us can dream. Now, companies like 3T make their money on offering stems and bars that can get 99% of people to "fit" on any size bike (within reason) -- yet we don't cry that their stems only come in 100, 110, and 120 instead of those necessary in-betweens like 105, 113 and 118 to REALLY get us dialed.

Where's the line? We all make choices. Dev mentioned a high-spec VW vs an Audi. I'd argue that 99% of us only need a Honda Accord. You know why? Because we are not professional drivers. Should we start begging auto manufacturers to measure our arms and legs and install the driver's seat and steering wheel so that we no longer need adjustability? No. Like bikes, adjustability (and resale value) are king.

If any manufacturer put everything that every consumer wanted into its product, we couldn't afford to buy it, because they couldn't afford to produce it, and they go out of business. Then we're back to start-up companies that offer a utilitarian product designed to fit the masses. That's the way it's always worked, and I predict that within our own competitive lifetimes, that's not going to change in regard to bike production.

/rant.

Hear hear on the Honda line!

I recall watching a Top Gear episode a few years ago and they compared a 70's Super Car (Ferrari or Aston Martin or something) with the then new Honda Accord V6. The Honda killed the supercar in every respect, including accelleration and cornering!

I still ride my P2K from 8 years ago, and to quote Slowman from his review of the P2K, "this bike is not what's keeping you off the podium"

None of us NEED Uber bike that's just come out, and reality, it really won't win us anything except an empty savings account, but we all WANT one, and given enough cash we can have one. Just because it's what we want, doesn't mean it needs to be affordable (by each individuals definition of affordable)

By the way, tgarson, that wasn't directed at you -- just my thoughts on the situation in general :) I'll shut up and go ride my P2 now....

Thinking along similar lines. All this talk about the New P3 is making me investigate the old SC7.

ding ding

the old p3 curve around the wheel design is old busted.

the new p3 and p5 and s5 is the new hotness.

I've not seen you start a thread like this for any other manufacturer other than Cervelo. Why not?

Oh man, you're so right that Cervelo missed out on using P5-1:



Maybe they didn't go for it because they're Canadian?

Forgive my ignorance, but what does the increased bottom bracket drop do?


Thanks,


twomarks

why are you pedaling when leaning the bike that much? isn't this user error? I never got a pedal to the ground and really wonder how people manage to do that?

.

My exact thoughts.....it's not like you would use the new P3 or P5 in a criterium...they are meant for timed TT events.

Actually, if you look closely at the design and geometry of the new P3, it's not hard to predict that soon that it will indeed also be used as a road bike, kind of another option over the S5. So, yes, I think you will see them in criteriums.

It would be an expensive bike for crits only though.

Honestly, can anyone say, in which order a Scott, a Trek a Cervelo P5 and a P3 perform and whats the difference is in minutes, all other things (position + equipement) being equal?

no because wind angle may make a certain bike better than another bike depending on how hard that wind is and what angle its going at. All of those bikes could be fastest depending on the wind on a particular day.

The car industry has done that for a long time, we simply know what "mpg" is and how it is calculated. I want a similar standard for "speed per watt". Currently I can't decide between bikes based on facts, I only can based on believes.

Might not the results for each bike vary with a particular rider, i.e., how rider A interacts with a particular bike aerodynamically may be different than rider B due to body size, shape, etc?

The car industry has done that for a long time, we simply know what "mpg" is and how it is calculated.

all you are mentioning as already been done. it s still required a good amount of analysis and knowledge to read the results. But the question you ask have been answered.

.

Once again, all the question you asked have been answered clearly. But if you don't want to do research for a 6k investment, it s up to you.

Cerv�lo stated a while ago

P2 to p5 is 100-150gram difference 10-15 watts....put that in whatever course you want and you got your answer.
That's in the 1.5sec + time saving by km....

How many km will you ride? Can you do math?

.
.

So test without a rider or with a normalized dummy.

This is a very strange industry. So I am expected to shell out 6.000+ bucks and do my own research? Yeah, right. I will stay with my 2.000 EUR P2 for longer. If the industry is not convincing me to buy a super bike, I won't. And the only way to convince me, is to give me agreed upon facts.

As long as I don't understand, whether a speed concept or a p5 is faster and by how much over a P2, I will invest my money elsewhere.

Same goes for wheels, I know, that a 808 front should be faster than a H3. But by how much if I use a 20mm tire? The car industry invests a lot of brain to explain their product, if the triathlon industry expects the consumer to do that job, it will attract some, but not all potential customers.

Might not the results for each bike vary with a particular rider, i.e., how rider A interacts with a particular bike aerodynamically may be different than rider B due to body size, shape, etc?

Why would someone go for the new P3 when the P5 is only $500 more? I'm sure this has already been answered.

I've been on both the new P3 and P5. I think that the P3 is the ultimate bike for somebody doing an Ironman because it's smoother and more forgiving than the P5, yet still stiff and responsive. If I were doing an Ironman I would pick it over the P5 in a heartbeat. I also had the P3 and P5 at the same time, so I took some photos of them together if you're interested in comparing them aesthetically.

They should also have a cheaper Ultegra version available soon.

Damon or anyone else,

Could you post pictures of how the wiring attaches to the external battery on the downtube of the new P3?

Thanks
Power1369

My lbs said stages would not work with that crank, due to bottom bracket size. They said I would need an entirely differently crank set to be compatible with stages, and by that point considering $, a different brand of power meter would make more sense. Can someone else confirm this?

Thanks for this post. Please could you confirm I have understood correctly there is no need to a lower crown race on p3c 2014. As the fsa one supplied does not fit. Just building one now and this would make sense. There's not much info about this written anywhere. Many thanks in advance. James.

How about we get some more pictures on this thread? Would like to see the P3 with slick aero wheels.

Thanks for this post. Please could you confirm I have understood correctly there is no need to a lower crown race on p3c 2014. As the fsa one supplied does not fit. Just building one now and this would make sense. There's not much info about this written anywhere. Many thanks in advance. James.

here is my P3 on Flo's

Finally got round to getting my P3 exactly the way I want it.


When I bought it it came with 3T aura bars which were nice and comfortable but reasonably weighty, and the big annoyance was that they had upturned bar ends, which did suit the Magura RT6 brakes, which are designed to be flat, they also look way way better this way, and we all no if it looks good it must be fast!


So first I swapped the bars with a 3T Brezza, flat bar ends, and s-bend extensions. This meant re cabling the hydraulic brakes which was good news as both hoses were way to long. The front was hanging out the side and causing a bit of drag. I shortened this so now it comes right out the top of the brake and up to connect to the stem where its got a small zip tie.


The rear hose also previously entered the frame through the side of the top tube, which is a bit odd, as there is space for it to enter in the top along with the gear cables. So I re-threaded it through the top and shortened it so it sits nice and tight to the frame.


All in all way cleaner.

How about we get some more pictures on this thread? Would like to see the P3 with slick aero wheels.

have been on my new P3 for the past month and absolutely love it
Swapped out the Magura brakes for Ultegra TT brake lever / shifters and Ultegra Calipers
the Rotor cranks were also swapped out for Ultegra compacts with Stages PM
Still to come is a single behind the seat bottle holder for my spares "bottle' but I can't find one yet that fits with the Adamo Attack saddle as theres not enough of the "hole" left for an X-Lab Sonic.
Also I want to put a 30mm lifter under the arm pads to lower the base bars by 30mm

If I knew how to post a pic I would.... but I don't...

you'll have to look me up in Kona ( backhand brag... lol )

---

---

As David says this is a very common issue to experience on bikes with press fit cups, especially when ridden often (or sometimes) in rainy, grimy weather. I might also recommend the Wheels MFG PF30 bb w/ angular contact bearings. That seems to be the best replacement available.