Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Corrections to my comments about Cervelo Soloist.
Quote | Reply
A man who's opinions and facts on such matters I respect was dilligent enough to correct my comments on the Cervelo Soloist I made previously in another thread. I wanted to start a new thread on my corrections to let people know I made this error and to correct it. Specifically:

I reported that a Blue Black Cervelo Soloist was "sold to us as a 2003". A more accurate statement is that we took delivery of the bike either in the 2003 model year as a closeout or just prior to it. This is the bike that was discussed in my (Bikesport's) review. However, Cervelo does regard this bike as a 2002 model year bike. It is not a 2003 as my statements would have one believe. I do not have written documentation to support the delivery date of this bicycle used in our test. It is not the reasonable and customary practice of Bikesport, Inc. to preserve these records.

It should be emphasized that my comments about my Soloist Team pertain to a bike that has been ridden by me with a recalled fork, and that Cervelo has contacted me on three occasions to replace this fork, offering to provide a replacement at no cost to me. The fact that the fork has not been replaced by me in keeping with Cervelo's repeated requests that I do so is my responsibility. Cervelo has been proactive about providing an improved fork at no cost in a timely manner. I have been derelict in replacing my fork.

While my comments about the handling characteristics of the Cervelo Soloist were negative in tenor, it is fair to assert that these same handling characteristics may be regarded as acceptable or desireable by a different rider depending on their riding ability, application for the bike and level of experience. Please remember these comments are my opinions.

http://www.bikesportmichigan.com/reviews/cerv-solo/images/solomaintriangle.jpg

For additional clarification the link above provides a photo of the seat stays of the bike we tested at Bikesport for our review. The seatstays of my current bike are identical. I thought they were curved. I failed to check them before I put the post up in the thread on this forum. I just checked my current seat stays for appearance against the ones that appear in the photo of our review bike: They are visually similar. I have been further corrected to say that they are, in fact, identical and that my assertion they were different was erroneous. they are, in fact the same. I was wrong.

I do apologize for these errors.

Tom Demerly
The Tri Shop.com
Quote Reply
Re: Corrections to my comments about Cervelo Soloist. [Tom Demerly] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Interesting........so is it safe to assume the forks were recalled for handling issues as much as for the potential cracking of the crown or is your crown perhaps cracked thus leading to the handling issues?



=====================================
It's ALL about the bike!
Quote Reply
Re: Corrections to my comments about Cervelo Soloist. [asd99] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
No it is not safe to assume that. I do not know the reasons for the recall.

Tom Demerly
The Tri Shop.com
Quote Reply
Re: Corrections to my comments about Cervelo Soloist. [Tom Demerly] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Tom, from my owner experiences, Cervelo makes one heck of a good tri bike. The Soloist is probably a good compact frame road bike, but I'm in no big hurry to trade my Giant TCR in for one.
Quote Reply
Re: Corrections to my comments about Cervelo Soloist. [Tom Demerly] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Tom you have a law degree? That post sounds like a warning label. Kid's don't try this at home etc. Pretty good one at that. Now change that fork and get on the bike and ride it.
Quote Reply
Post deleted by The Committee [ In reply to ]
Re: Corrections to my comments about Cervelo Soloist. [TheChameleon] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
As usual, your guess would be wrong.

Tom Demerly
The Tri Shop.com
Quote Reply