First of all, I'm not an expert in anything tri related. But I spent a lot of time looking at bike fit because I have some challenges in that area. I am male 5'8" 40 yr old 160# and ride a size 48 cervelo. Properly fitted. It has 650 wheels. Do I wish it had 700s? yes. But the frame geometry dictates 650s. I wish I had 700s just for tire selection. I also own an older touring bike with 27 inch wheels. Frame fits ok, wheels don't seem to matter. If I run skinny tires on it I can't tell the difference in rolling resistance or ease of pedaling in a particular gear. What I can tell is comfort level of a touring frame and weight of said frame as relates to acceleration. So I would not worry about wheel size and concentrate on seeeing if the P3 is the right frame for you. I ride a Dual and would not consider a P3 as it is too "steep" for me to ride comfortably. Find a good fitter, this forum can help you find one in your area, and get measured, then ask them what fits. This is what experts are for. And also why they cost so much.

---

Jim

**Note above poster works for a retailer selling bikes and related gear*

I wouldn't recommend a P3.
Personaly I've always liked the P3 in larger sizes, but I don't think it's quite the same bike in smaller sizes.
I'd try for something a little lighter, and heck, with no price limitations explore titanium and carbon options.
You might want to try to the new Giant TT carbon in size small with a nice pink t-mobile paint scheme.
Or you could beg him really sweetly, and promise him some "special" married workouts and he might let you get a custom Razor too.

You will find of plenty of info/data about the minimal benefits of "rolling resistance" of various tires (tubular, clincher, 650/700, etc.) and the FAR great benefit of an aero position and comfort on a properly fitting bike.

At 5'-2" with a 700cc wheel under your headset, I doubt you could even get low enough on the front end with no spacers and a very low set of pads/bars. Now, this may be comfortable, but you have your Trek for that. No need to get a heavy (relative to the competition), super aero frame and sit up on it. That drag would far outweigh any minimal benefit the 700cc wheel might give. I think your husband just wants to share wheels/tires :)

---

____________________________________
Fatigue is biochemical, not biomechanical.
- Andrew Coggan, PhD

I had been shopping for bikes last fall. I drove up to Signature cycles www.signaturecycles.com and Paul levine set up the size cycle to every possbile frame geometry we could find. It was a really great way to "test" ride every possible frame geometry in my size before plunking down real money. I believe Paul charges a couple hundred bucks for the service and if you buy a serotta then it is covered in the bike.



Lot of Luck

Kevin

Another victim of persuasive marketing. The stuff you're worried about probably accounts for far less than 1% of your speed on the bike. Just go ride and enjoy it.

You sound just like me. Except I've been on an aluminum road geometry bike (52) that was too big from the get go. (I'm 5'4 and short in the torso.) I'm looking to gain more speed and comfort for tris and TTs.

What I did was start with a highly recommended bike shop. I queried on my local triclub forums and asked around to get a name. Last year he fit me on my current bike that I didn't buy from him and did a great job. He doesn't carry Cervelo which made me hesitate in going to him for my new bike (I wanted to tri one too!) but he carries lots of good brands.

He spent a great deal of time dialing me in on different bikes in his shop to get a handle on size and what geometry I looked best on. Then he is letting me demo different bikes. I'm trying bikes in Al, Ti and carbon. Road and tri. 650 and 700. I do a 30-40 mile outdoor ride and some power testing on my computrainer. It's very time consuming and ultimately may be overkill but I'm a very analytical person. Some people can just get an initial impression from a short ride but I can't.

Not sure if that helps you any but that's been my approach. It's very confusing with so many bikes out there and so many different opinions from different people not many of whom are short females!

Good luck!

on this very site slowman indicated that in roll-offs between 650's and 700's, the 650's out-rolled the bigger wheel every time ... i think the "lower rolling resistance" concept is perhaps technically correct but practically useless. honestly, what possible difference could rolling resistance make? we've seen posts on the minute differences that aero wheels, aero frames, etc, make over the distance of a race, you're telling me that the contact patch of a 700 tire vs a 650 is going to be worth measuring?

besides, as a 650 rider, i feel that on smaller frames, smaller wheels look better, why get a beautiful, small frame and then suspend it in the air on outsized hoops?

Read this from Slowman.

http://www.slowtwitch.com/mainheadings/techctr/rolling.html
the section on 650 vs 700

---

_________________
Dick

Take everything I say with a grain of salt. I know nothing.

Actually the contact patch area would be the same for both sizes of wheels provided that the tires were of the same make and had the same pressure. The 700 wheel contact patch might be a little bit longer but narrower.

As for rolling resistance I believe there is no difference between the two because of this.

jaretj