2012 Cervelo P3 (Long and low frame) Question

Aug 2, 18 10:20

Post #1 of 17 (3347 views)

Question about the old P3. I have a chance to get a brand new, never been built old P3 frame (2012) for cheap. I have always loved that bike and the geometry fits me better than my old P2 does, so I am considering buying it. I would build it up with 11-speed ultegra (from ChainReactionCycles.com) and move my power meter and 808's over from my P2, to give me an all in cost for the full bike today under $1500 total. In addition, I could sell my old P2 with the original crank and wheels and with brand new FR and RD to re-coop a few dollars. Long story short, the overall investment is pretty minimal.

I know there are faster frames out there today for sure, so I know I will be giving up some time, but that frame has always been one of my favorites and I love the way it looks more than just about any bikes available today. My question is, how much am I really giving up in an Ironman by going with that old P3 versus today's bikes or even a current P3? I'm currently on a 2012 P2, so I know at worst it's faster than my current ride, but I'm curious versus new bikes.

Thanks.

Re: 2012 Cervelo P3 (Long and low frame) Question [HoustonAg] [ In reply to ]

Aug 2, 18 10:48

Post #2 of 17 (3320 views)

In don’t remember the p3 being that much faster than the p2.

The p3 to p4 difference in a 40k was about 45-60 seconds. The p4 to p5 I think was another 45-60 seconds and the new p3 is about as fast as the p5 so maybe a 60-90 seconds compared to the new one.

One caveat to that is if you can get as good of a position on the new p3 as the old. You may not depending on your morphology.

Re: 2012 Cervelo P3 (Long and low frame) Question [HoustonAg] [ In reply to ]

Aug 2, 18 10:56

Post #3 of 17 (3309 views)

With a Tririg front end, brakes, and a disc wheel the P3C is right up with there with current bikes. Maybe not in the lead, but you wouldn't be losing much.

Re: 2012 Cervelo P3 (Long and low frame) Question [gmh39] [ In reply to ]

Aug 2, 18 11:25

Post #4 of 17 (3280 views)

I think that’s the big thing much is relative. 60 seconds in a 40k if you’re AG podiuming races is huge.

But it sounds like he’s coming from a p2c. If that’s the case and he has a good fit on that I’d do everything you said well before switching to the p3.

You also have the wide wheel issue on the p3. It’s going to run unless it is the flat disc. I think even the old clincher disc might have been too wide. Not that that’s a bad wheel but there are faster ones now.

Re: 2012 Cervelo P3 (Long and low frame) Question [Grant.Reuter] [ In reply to ]

Aug 2, 18 11:34

Post #5 of 17 (3262 views)

Grant.Reuter wrote:

In don’t remember the p3 being that much faster than the p2.

The p3 to p4 difference in a 40k was about 45-60 seconds. The p4 to p5 I think was another 45-60 seconds and the new p3 is about as fast as the p5 so maybe a 60-90 seconds compared to the new one.

One caveat to that is if you can get as good of a position on the new p3 as the old. You may not depending on your morphology.

Thanks. That's about what I thought on the time difference. I think I was just looking for ST validation that I'm not wasting money on a frame that is completely outdated compared to today's just because it's a frame I love.

As far the new versus the old, that really comes down to $$$, about $2500 more to be specific. I about 99% sure that a new P3 is not something the wife will be ok with considering there's nothing wrong with my current P2.

Re: 2012 Cervelo P3 (Long and low frame) Question [Grant.Reuter] [ In reply to ]

Aug 2, 18 11:34

Post #6 of 17 (3261 views)

I seriously doubt the p5 is 2 min slower than a p3 over 40k, that would be 240g of drag! Do you have any data on this? My guess is <30s between p5 and p3. Especially since the felt b series is less than 80g from the p5x.

Terrible Tuesday’s Triathlon

Last edited by: oscaro: Aug 2, 18 11:40

Re: 2012 Cervelo P3 (Long and low frame) Question [Grant.Reuter] [ In reply to ]

Aug 2, 18 11:39

Post #7 of 17 (3249 views)

Grant.Reuter wrote:

You also have the wide wheel issue on the p3. It’s going to run unless it is the flat disc. I think even the old clincher disc might have been too wide. Not that that’s a bad wheel but there are faster ones now.

I use a tubular sub 9 on my p3, it is tight but it works fine.

Tiago
---------------------
Sponsors: : Blueseventy :

Re: 2012 Cervelo P3 (Long and low frame) Question [Grant.Reuter] [ In reply to ]

Aug 2, 18 11:44

Post #8 of 17 (3241 views)

I have the occasional podium in local races, but nothing on the bigger scene. I'm around a 21 mph average for an Ironman, so not front of pack but I'm definitely there to push my limits and to be more than just a finisher. local races, I'm usually in the 22-24 mph range depending on how technical the course is.

As far as the P2, it's never been a great fit for me and I have never really been truly comfortable on it. At the time I bought it my fitter told me the P3 was a better fit, but he could make the P2 work since I really wanted a Cervelo, I just didn't have the money for a P3 6 years ago (although, now that I have the money I'm no longer single and can't just buy what I want when I want, catch 22 of life).

The wheel issue is something I hadn't thought of. I have a set of newer 808's, so i should look into whether they would fit or not.

Last edited by: HoustonAg: Aug 2, 18 11:46

Re: 2012 Cervelo P3 (Long and low frame) Question [HoustonAg] [ In reply to ]

Aug 2, 18 11:48

Post #9 of 17 (3233 views)

Wheel issue is probably the biggest reason I’d be hesitant to do this. I have considered similar purchases before only to decide against them for wheel clearance reasons

Re: 2012 Cervelo P3 (Long and low frame) Question [oscaro] [ In reply to ]

Aug 2, 18 12:22

Post #10 of 17 (3214 views)

It depends a lot on yaw. You’ll have to search there were a few threads on here comparing them. Of course I can’t seem to find those right now.

When it come to the p4 to the p5, the yaw is going to matter a ton. If it’s around zero it may not be any gain. I mean you actually stop with the p5, so that’s a nice plus but it’s drag won’t be that different.

I’m also assuming that we’re talking stock set ups. Which comparatively the p3 stock set up was horrible compared to today’s bikes.

Re: 2012 Cervelo P3 (Long and low frame) Question [HoustonAg] [ In reply to ]

Aug 2, 18 12:27

Post #11 of 17 (3209 views)

I thought Kylie covered all this in a previous thread. I could be remembering wrong but I thought the ultimate answer was there was actually very minimal if any difference between today's P5 and the P4 and very little difference between the P4 and the old P3.

Re: 2012 Cervelo P3 (Long and low frame) Question [HoustonAg] [ In reply to ]

Aug 2, 18 12:28

Post #12 of 17 (3209 views)

There isn’t much of a difference in fit between the p2 and p3. If I remember right we’re talking 2cm in headtube height. So if you don’t fit right on the p2 it is not going to change much to the p3.

Re: 2012 Cervelo P3 (Long and low frame) Question [Grant.Reuter] [ In reply to ]

Aug 2, 18 13:00

Post #13 of 17 (3184 views)

I've gone through some old threads hear, none say anything close to what you are claiming. I have a 2010 P2 which is pretty much stock except for wheels and a shimano pro bar, and I reckon i'm giving up around 30s on new superbikes over 40k. The cool factor in a p4 is probably worth at least a few min as well ;)

Terrible Tuesday’s Triathlon

Re: 2012 Cervelo P3 (Long and low frame) Question [HoustonAg] [ In reply to ]

Aug 2, 18 15:12

Post #14 of 17 (3116 views)

w/o reading the other comments....

P2C is possibly faster than P3C (frame vs frame). Speculation born from the fact that P2C tunnel numbers were never released

That said... if your fit can be more aggressive and is currently curtailed by the P2 geometry then the P3 opens up those possibilities.

P3 with some mods can be very very very close to a P4 (still (one of) the fastest low yaw bike on the market).

Renn discs work well on the P3C, and with latex tube and a vittoria open TLR you gonna be 'zoom zoom.' Haven't had issues with wide brake track front wheels.

36 kona qualifiers 2006-'23 - 3 Kona Podiums - 4 OA IM AG wins - 5 IM AG wins - 18 70.3 AG wins
I ka nana no a 'ike -- by observing, one learns | Kulia i ka nu'u -- strive for excellence
Garmin Glycogen Use App | Garmin Fat Use App

Re: 2012 Cervelo P3 (Long and low frame) Question [Grant.Reuter] [ In reply to ]

Aug 2, 18 15:49

Post #15 of 17 (3100 views)

I own a couple of old P3Cs (2008 and 2011 vintages). They are both consistently faster than my P5 -- 30-60 seconds over 40K. Much of that may be from the narrower q-factor (121 on the P3C vs. 150 on the P5). But that's worth at most 90 seconds. So that says the frames are really not that different. With a newer P5 or P3 you're going to be stuck with a BBRight (AKA BStupid or PresShit) bottom bracket. Unless you're lucky, you're going to have a BB system that grinds, creaks, and probably costs you several watts in bearing drag. Any aero advantage is lost to that stupidity. If you want a decent aerobar (e.g. USE Tula or Morph), you're also going to have to get rid of the PITA hydraulic brakes on the P5. The P5 is also a tad on the heavy side.

My latest book: "Out of the Melting Pot, Into the Fire" is on sale on Amazon and at other online and local booksellers

Re: 2012 Cervelo P3 (Long and low frame) Question [HoustonAg] [ In reply to ]

Aug 2, 18 16:00

Post #16 of 17 (3089 views)

I have a 2012 P3 and a 2011 P2. The P3 seems to be a little faster, but I also have a 53/39 on the P3 and a 50/34 on the P2. I use the P3 for flat and shorter tris and the P2 for the hills....but on a flat course I think the P3 is a little faster. Cancellara won the TT world championship on that P3 frame, so it's no slouch by any means!

Re: 2012 Cervelo P3 (Long and low frame) Question [HoustonAg] [ In reply to ]

Aug 2, 18 18:03

Post #17 of 17 (3055 views)

HoustonAg wrote:

As far as the P2, it's never been a great fit for me and I have never really been truly comfortable on it.

Why exactly is it "not great"? If it's a 54 or bigger, then the P3 will have lower stack. Or another way of looking at it is you can get a bigger size and more reach and keep the stack the same. Are you after less stack or more reach?

In reality if you put a good clean setup on the P3C (and the cable routing mod) you would not be giving up anything significant to the best current bikes. Guesstimates of "1 min per hour" don't make a lot of sense. That's 1.7% less speed, or ~4.5% more aero drag for the whole system. An entire bike and wheels is ~25% of the total drag. The frame alone (minus parts, wheels, bars, etc), is surely less than 10%? So where on the P3C do you see excessive frontal area or poor aero shaping that would result in that huge increase (45%+)?

I'd guess it's more like a handful of seconds. Less than 10.

Our Partners

transition-DOT-area-AT-slowtwitch-DOT-com

Advertise with us

©1999-2024 Slowtwitch, Inc., and Slowtwitch.com
Reproduction of material from any Slowtwitch.com page
without written permission is strictly prohibited.