Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
“Cervelo S5 Fail” Your Thoughts
Quote | Reply
Raoul of Luescher Teknik tears into the design of Cervelo S5 and shreds it to pieces. What are your thoughts?


Last edited by: benonlees: Mar 5, 20 8:28
Quote Reply
Re: “Cervelo S5 Fail” Your Thoughts [benonlees] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
THIS will certainly impact my desire for the S5, unless there are something inside we don't see that re-enforces the area. If it is as he described, sharp-edged metal hitting thin carbon, then it's absolutely a design FAIL, big time.
Quote Reply
Re: “Cervelo S5 Fail” Your Thoughts [benonlees] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
If actually true, I certainly didn't expect anything like this from Cervelo, but when this version came out, I just didn’t like the the design, which is what lead me to buy the previous year's S5 model.
Last edited by: DFW_Tri: Mar 7, 20 6:02
Quote Reply
Re: “Cervelo S5 Fail” Your Thoughts [dalava] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
“Impact” your desire. Love the pun!
Quote Reply
Re: “Cervelo S5 Fail” Your Thoughts [benonlees] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
that is ridiculous. this makes 5 significant design errors by Cervelo.

First iteration of their carbon R series bike, the R2.5 that CSC rode had a recall on frame
Second, the wolf fork had a recall
Third, the P4. The whole frame. Disc wheels wouldn't fit a TT bike.
Fourth, the B-Bright bottom bracket would creak like hell and 3 different mechanics I had work on it could not get it to go away. Apparently they have fixed that issue now with new design

and now this which is a significant safety risk by looks of it.

I just bought an Aspero gravel. fingers crossed!

@rhyspencer
Quote Reply
Re: “Cervelo S5 Fail” Your Thoughts [rhys] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Add to that the safety recall for the 3T Aduro basebar that was stock on the last gen P5.

Also, for those interested, Hambini does a complete (NSFW) takedown of Cervelo bottom brackets as well. His main point: Cervelo engineers have loosened there manufacturing tolerance standards such that frames may be produced with ovular shaped bottom brackets, making it nearly impossible to fit bearings and or a bottom bracket into the frame. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GWDztuezn0g.

CG
Quote Reply
Re: “Cervelo S5 Fail” Your Thoughts [CeeGee90] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
CeeGee90 wrote:
Add to that the safety recall for the 3T Aduro basebar that was stock on the last gen P5.

sounds like a 3T problem

Quote:
Also, for those interested, Hambini does a complete (NSFW) takedown of Cervelo bottom brackets as well. His main point: Cervelo engineers have loosened there manufacturing tolerance standards such that frames may be produced with ovular shaped bottom brackets, making it nearly impossible to fit bearings and or a bottom bracket into the frame. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GWDztuezn0g.

taking anything that guy says seriously would be a mistake.

Accelerate3 Coaching https://accelerate3.com/
Moxie Multisport https://www.themoxiemultisport.com/
Quote Reply
Re: “Cervelo S5 Fail” Your Thoughts [CeeGee90] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Some of what Hambini spouts about that is wrong tho.
He quotes tolerances for the bearing installation. But then compares to the housing (= frame hole) tolerances.
He chose to forget the metal bearing 'cup' that the bearing actually fits into - which will 'absorb' a considerable amount of ovality in the frame hole without doing the same distortion to the bearing housing bore.
He's selectively mis-quoting figures.
Quote Reply
Re: “Cervelo S5 Fail” Your Thoughts [jkhayc] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Good to know.

CG
Quote Reply
Re: “Cervelo S5 Fail” Your Thoughts [rhys] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
rhys wrote:
that is ridiculous. this makes 5 significant design errors by Cervelo.

First iteration of their carbon R series bike, the R2.5 that CSC rode had a recall on frame
Second, the wolf fork had a recall
Third, the P4. The whole frame. Disc wheels wouldn't fit a TT bike.
Fourth, the B-Bright bottom bracket would creak like hell and 3 different mechanics I had work on it could not get it to go away. Apparently they have fixed that issue now with new design

and now this which is a significant safety risk by looks of it.


I just bought an Aspero gravel. fingers crossed!

5 whole errors since the r2.5 holy crap call the BBB.

R2.5, limited number of frames and they were late model ones. Sounds like more of a manufacturing problem than design it wasn’t the whole model line.

Wolf fork - Cervelo didn’t produce these they specd them on their bikes. Not only that after the type of stress was determined to be a failure point Cervelo stopped using them and voluntarily recalled them, even though the company who produced them wouldn’t recall them.

P4- the frame was not recalled. If you tightened the bolt in front of the seatpost too tight it could potentially split a small piece of the carbon behind the seatpost making it very difficult to tighten moving forward. Cervelo basically have everyone a new 2011 p4 if this happened even though the person tightening the bolt was normally at fault.

The frame also fits disc wheels that were out at the time they were designing the frame. It was unfortunate that zipp went super wide with discs the same time the frames started to come out, but that wasn’t realistically their fault. Shit happens.


The bottom bracket can creak on the newer frames I will give you that.

-----------------------------------------------------------
De Soto Sport Athlete
Formerly Draketriathlon
Quote Reply
Re: “Cervelo S5 Fail” Your Thoughts [benonlees] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
You know he's also torn apart Enve, right?

He literally makes (something of) a living off cutting apart companies' products (literally and figuratively).

Accelerate3 Coaching https://accelerate3.com/
Moxie Multisport https://www.themoxiemultisport.com/
Quote Reply
Re: “Cervelo S5 Fail” Your Thoughts [Grantbot21] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Grantbot21 wrote:
rhys wrote:
that is ridiculous. this makes 5 significant design errors by Cervelo.

First iteration of their carbon R series bike, the R2.5 that CSC rode had a recall on frame
Second, the wolf fork had a recall
Third, the P4. The whole frame. Disc wheels wouldn't fit a TT bike.
Fourth, the B-Bright bottom bracket would creak like hell and 3 different mechanics I had work on it could not get it to go away. Apparently they have fixed that issue now with new design

and now this which is a significant safety risk by looks of it.


I just bought an Aspero gravel. fingers crossed!

5 whole errors since the r2.5 holy crap call the BBB.

R2.5, limited number of frames and they were late model ones. Sounds like more of a manufacturing problem than design it wasn’t the whole model line.

Wolf fork - Cervelo didn’t produce these they specd them on their bikes. Not only that after the type of stress was determined to be a failure point Cervelo stopped using them and voluntarily recalled them, even though the company who produced them wouldn’t recall them.

P4- the frame was not recalled. If you tightened the bolt in front of the seatpost too tight it could potentially split a small piece of the carbon behind the seatpost making it very difficult to tighten moving forward. Cervelo basically have everyone a new 2011 p4 if this happened even though the person tightening the bolt was normally at fault.

The frame also fits disc wheels that were out at the time they were designing the frame. It was unfortunate that zipp went super wide with discs the same time the frames started to come out, but that wasn’t realistically their fault. Shit happens.


The bottom bracket can creak on the newer frames I will give you that.

Okay.... are you able to explain away this S5 design flaw though?
Quote Reply
Re: “Cervelo S5 Fail” Your Thoughts [Grantbot21] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I never said the P4 was recalled though I can see reading it carrying forward the previous 2 recalls it can be construed that was what I typed. I said the frame didn't fit discs. The P4 did not fit my Mavic disc at the time it launched. At that time Mavic was quite possibly the best disc on market. The brakes were, well not really brakes were they? What I was leaning to is the whole bike was crap. Please know, I have had 2 P3 bikes in my TRI racing. Great, affordable bikes. I have had an 2 R3s and an R5 which I loved. My point being if a company brands their business as outperforming competition with their engineering it is not a good luck. I am sure Specialized and Trek have had recalls but they don't brand themselves as outperforming engineers. I ride a Madone now and have a few complaints for sure. Love the bike, have issue with a few design flaws.

the design flaw in this video is pretty significant. If the internal piece causes delamination with it rubbing against the frame I assume a safety risk. As I traveler every time I packed down that bike its a risk.

perhaps I was a bit aggressive in the slam of Cervelo. Apparently I still hear the creaking in my ears-:)

@rhyspencer
Quote Reply
Re: “Cervelo S5 Fail” Your Thoughts [benonlees] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I have an S5 Disc and have not had any issues. My bike limits the turn well before it comes close to the frame.

Not sure I see this as a design fail. Take pretty much any new carbon aero frame and push the front beyond its turn limit and I am sure it will break too.

Sensational title with little substance. Reef your bars sideways and you bike may break might be a better title.
Quote Reply
Re: “Cervelo S5 Fail” Your Thoughts [TOTRI] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
TOTRI wrote:
I have an S5 Disc and have not had any issues. My bike limits the turn well before it comes close to the frame.

Not sure I see this as a design fail. Take pretty much any new carbon aero frame and push the front beyond its turn limit and I am sure it will break too.

Sensational title with little substance. Reef your bars sideways and you bike may break might be a better title.

Nice to hear from a current S5 disc owner! Could you elaborate on how your bike “limits the turn well before it comes close to the frame”?
Quote Reply
Re: “Cervelo S5 Fail” Your Thoughts [benonlees] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The turn limits about 2cm prior to coming in contact with the frame as he indicates. It may be a bit more or less. I have not pulled it apart to look at it but there is something inside the head tube which limits how far it turns. I could probably force it beyond that but that would require me to force it past where it wants to stop.
Quote Reply
Re: “Cervelo S5 Fail” Your Thoughts [TOTRI] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
i believe luescher (sp) is referring to internal stop (i.e. inside the head tube). i have pulled apart my front end but i don't remember looking at the front of the head tube (on the inside).

it's not something i find worrisome, and i am sure that the people at Cervelo are smarter than the guy on youtube.

Accelerate3 Coaching https://accelerate3.com/
Moxie Multisport https://www.themoxiemultisport.com/
Quote Reply
Re: “Cervelo S5 Fail” Your Thoughts [jkhayc] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
jkhayc wrote:
i am sure that the people at Cervelo are smarter than the guy on youtube.

Wait, what?! So, some dude trolling for clicks on YouTube isn't smarter than the people getting paid to do this for a living? Imagine that.
Quote Reply
Re: “Cervelo S5 Fail” Your Thoughts [el gato] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
el gato wrote:
jkhayc wrote:
i am sure that the people at Cervelo are smarter than the guy on youtube.

Wait, what?! So, some dude trolling for clicks on YouTube isn't smarter than the people getting paid to do this for a living? Imagine that.

That’s a little harsh! This dude used to be an aviation engineer who decided to start his own carbon bike repair company. If you look at the facts of the video, the S5 is designed in such a way where a metal cam comes into contact with the frame as a way to limit the travel. If you are comfortable with that, then good for you, however, I don’t think it’s fair to call that guy a troll.
Quote Reply
Re: “Cervelo S5 Fail” Your Thoughts [el gato] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
el gato wrote:
jkhayc wrote:
i am sure that the people at Cervelo are smarter than the guy on youtube.


Wait, what?! So, some dude trolling for clicks on YouTube isn't smarter than the people getting paid to do this for a living? Imagine that.


Well..... the designers of the Boeing 737MAX were also paid to do it for a living. Mistakes can still happen.
Last edited by: benonlees: Mar 5, 20 19:55
Quote Reply
Re: “Cervelo S5 Fail” Your Thoughts [benonlees] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
To be fair, the problem with the Boeing 737 max was a systems engineering failure, not a design engineering failure. A bike is a bit less complicated than an airplane, so I doubt cervelo has that kind of problem. That being said, they can make mistakes I'm sure.

Also, regarding the metal cam that stops the travel, how is that any different than the metal pin which stopped travel in previous frames? Additionally, if I remember right the guy said that the damage happened when the bars were twisted violently in a crash. So yes, the S5 disc isnt very damage tolerant, but I dont think that makes it a bad frame.
Last edited by: imswimmer328: Mar 5, 20 22:30
Quote Reply
Re: “Cervelo S5 Fail” Your Thoughts [benonlees] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
It's not rocket science to build in a protective bumper.

example: Bianchi Aquila CV rubber bumper under the head tube. stops the fork from crashing into the frame and damaging it.

Sure, it isn't as elegant, but it's a much better solution.
Quote Reply
Re: “Cervelo S5 Fail” Your Thoughts [jkhayc] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
still not clear how common that delamination is or how much force it needs - was his example frame from a crash?


its good to be aware of but isnt this still much preferred to when handlebars used to swing around (when dropped, in an accident, when carrying the bike) and the handelbars put a dent in the top tube?

why would cervelo would remove the lower limiter pin from the first model? was it too heavy?
Quote Reply
Re: “Cervelo S5 Fail” Your Thoughts [imswimmer328] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
imswimmer328 wrote:
To be fair, the problem with the Boeing 737 max was a systems engineering failure, not a design engineering failure. A bike is a bit less complicated than an airplane, so I doubt cervelo has that kind of problem. That being said, they can make mistakes I'm sure.

Also, regarding the metal cam that stops the travel, how is that any different than the metal pin which stopped travel in previous frames? Additionally, if I remember right the guy said that the damage happened when the bars were twisted violently in a crash. So yes, the S5 disc isnt very damage tolerant, but I dont think that makes it a bad frame.

Point taken on the 737!

The metal pin on the previous model was a sacrificial part that was non structural. The metal cam directly uses the inside of the HT to stop travel.
Quote Reply
Re: “Cervelo S5 Fail” Your Thoughts [lacticturkey] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
lacticturkey wrote:
still not clear how common that delamination is or how much force it needs - was his example frame from a crash?


its good to be aware of but isnt this still much preferred to when handlebars used to swing around (when dropped, in an accident, when carrying the bike) and the handelbars put a dent in the top tube?

why would cervelo would remove the lower limiter pin from the first model? was it too heavy?

Handle bars swinging into the frame for most bike frames require an extreme angle which would happen only in a crash or very rare circumstances.

The angle in which the metal cam slams into the HT under the nose cone seems less than 90 degrees. I speculate that something as minor as a gust of wind while bike is racked in transition could lead to the handlebars turning enough for the cam to make contact. We don’t know what kind of tolerance to impact the frame has, but I would not underestimate the force produced by heavy aero handlebars and possibly clip ons combined with the torque from a long stem. This is then exacerbated by the fact that all this force is channeled into the small surface area of the metal cam into the head tube.

One could argue if it’s a flaw or not, but if I were to pay top dollar for this bike moving forward, I would definitely want Cervelo to come out and provide an explanation.
Quote Reply

Prev Next