I really like Cervelo (though I don't now nor have I ever owned one..and no I don't work for them..but I am Canadian..gotta love disclaimers) BUT if given the choice between two bikes one with Ultegra and one with 105..and the Ultegra is $100 cheaper...well it isn't too hard to see where I would put my money. As a bonus buying the Roo (which I have never owned either) is like buying some history..as they were pretty much the innovators of the forward position tri bike. Sorry Cervelo this one is a no brainer.

Of course you are going to get the standard "get the bike that fits" response. I am a QR fan, so I would recommend their product.

----->Trent

Hey now..he didn't say he wanted a bike that fit. Let the man be led by his desires..sheesh. Sure..if you really want to go fast AND be comfortable for the run afterwards go for a bike that fits...but that's just a suggestion.

It would be a no-brainer if the frames were comparable. The geometric differences between the two bikes are huge, the Soloist is a 73 OR 76 degree adjustable geometyr, the Zero Gravity is fixed at 75 degrees. Since the poster wants to do so many different things, this is important.

Then the Soloist is full-aero, the ZG is full-round. The Soloist is a pro-level frame (little known fact but the Soloist Tyler rode in LBL was actually the Soloist 105 frame, not the Team version - the team had both to get feedback on the differences).

But I agree that one should buy the one that fits, and I am fairly sure that will be the Cervelo. Read Slowman's review of the ZG to figure out why I think that. I can't actually find the 2003 review but in the 2004 review he says "Last year QR hit a home run with the TiPhoon, and struck out with the Zero Gravity". The Soloist line is going into its fourth year, because it works.

---

Gerard Vroomen
3T.bike
OPEN cycle

See what happens when one is guilty of treason. Not to be picky here Gerard..but it's not the frame quality itself that separates the two but the range of fit that you're referring to correct? Again comparing apples and oranges...but is the Soloist made that much better than the ZG that it is worth the difference in parts cost? Not saying that it isn't but if the difference in parts on both bikes equates to, say, $300 and the soloist is already $100 more...is the soloist frame really worth $400 more than the Roo? A lot of people (not myself mind you..being politically correct as I can be) would suggest that a certain amount of that money comes from trend hype and not so much substance. I certainly did not/do not intend to insinuate that you're product is not all that it is claimed to be..but to ask the questions that some are afraid to ask (since I have already cut my own throat).

If you look at the ENTIRE spec instead of justhte Shimano monnikers you may find something else. As for the wider question of what is worth how much money, I like that approach but I think you're taking a funny look at it (and I mean truly funny, I am not mad or angry or upset or anything, just amused).

You say the price difference between 105 and Ultegra is $300. Why is that? There is much less difference between 105 and Ultegra than there is between a ZG and a Soloist frame. So why do you blindly accept the 105/Ultegra price difference and discard it on the frame part. Honestly I think you have a very hard time finding any difference between most 105 and Ultegra parts, except on maybe the STI (but even there). Just last week a customer of ours had trouble getting his Ultegra front derailleur to shift properly. The solution I gave him? Buy an old 105 derailleur. He did, and the problem was solved.

For the frames, is there enough difference between a $1000 frame and a $2000 frame to warrant the price difference? That is obviously a very personal issue, and I definitely think it is not necessarily tied to the price. There are expensive frames that are total junk, and less expensive frames that are very good. But it does cost a certain amount of money to do specific things to a frame, just like a DuraAce 10-speed crank is more expensive than a Tiagra crank.

But aside from all that, the poster does one triathlon a year and the rest road rides, why on earth should someone like that ride at 75 degrees the whole year? That makes no sense. Aside from the fact that the geometry of the ZG basically ranges from XXXXXXS - S when you really look at the numbers.

---

Gerard Vroomen
3T.bike
OPEN cycle

Very well put Gerard..exactly the kind of response that readers need to hear (you're welcome all of you..the things I do for this site). Who is to say 105 is worth $300 less than Ultegra in terms of value? Since I can't get Shimano on here to justify their price difference I needed you to justify your price difference I suppose. It does make me wonder some times why brand x and brand y, using presumably identical materials can sometimes be so far apart in terms of price. Sometimes I truly believe that hype has everything to do with it. In retrospect the comparisson of the two bikes is kind of worth a laugh.

Hopefully you have the opportunity to ride both bikes and that'll make it easier for you to decide. We can sit here all day long and promote our brands, but what it really comes down to is which bike fits you best, and which one most works for your riding style. Plus of course which bike's appearance makes you tick.
Hope this finds you well.
Herbert
Litespeed /QR

And that's exactly why it is so arbitrary. If you'd say your evaluation of 105 vs. Ultegra is $20, the frame difference is $120. If you think the parts difference is worth $500, the frames are $600 apart. All I know is, I'd be most concerned with frame geometry, then frame quality, then parts quality (except for the saddle, don't skimp on that).

Oh, and if anybody in the Chicago area wants to see Tyler's Soloist 105, I think it will be on display at the Chicago bike show.

Gerard.

---

Gerard Vroomen
3T.bike
OPEN cycle

Based upon your type of riding I'm partial to the Soloist since it's a genuine road bike that can easily be converted to a tri bike semi-steep angle (76 degrees). For riding hills you'll appreciate the Soloist road geometry 73.5 degrees over the QR fixed 75 degrees. It's also certainly more what you're used to riding.

IMO, the 75 fixed seat post is a sort of no man's land that is neither optimal for road or for tri.

Many thanks for the replies.

I will test-ride the Soloist. The QR ZG is going to be a bit harder to find.

My present bike (GT) has a 73.5deg ST angle, a 54cm Top Tube and an 11cm Head Tube!. My stem is down all the way.
I like the geometry--with a standard seatpost, but the stem is too long (13 cm) and the steering is a soft.

The Solo has a slacker geometry and a taller HT by 2cm (why?). The QR ZG has a 76deg ST angle and a short head tube.
That sounds better, since I run quite a bit too (40-50m/wk), but it needs to be test-ridden.

Dan's comments on the ZG seem to have to do with the bars? I am not afraid of having to switch to cowhorns once or twice a year,
and I like dropbars for climbing.

"I am not afraid of having to switch"

It's actually a real pain in the @ss. That's what I did with a Giant TCR for a short while with drops/Vision Tech's. Remember you also have to ride/train in either position not just switch the night before the race. The Soloist is minimal fuss to convert with the flip around seat post. Have a real good look at it. I still think it's your best bet especially if you're riding hills.

The QR is very similiar to the new Cervelo One as a "multi-sport" fixed position bike 75 degree bike. Also compare it to the QR if you're absolutely sold on the more steep angle.

The Soloist comes with dropbars. The head tube being so tall is strange...

It's not an unusually tall head tube. Don't have the Soloist/QR geometries handy but as you steepen a seat angle you'd expect the head tube to be shorter.

I've also noticed a lot of tri bikes in races with short head tubes with lots of spacers or upward angled stems. Sort of defeats the purpose of a short head tube. It's all about fit. Check them out and see which one you like best. They're both good companies but you have to decide whether you want a variable geometry (73.5-76) or a fixed geometry (75) bike.