Im on an E-112 coming from a 2007 B2. The Argon is far more stable and a more solid bike overall. I, also, am 6'1" 180lbs. In my opinion the Argon is the better buy. Being 180lbs, I had seatpost issues with two different Felts. hope this helps. Patrick

---

"I've sold my soul to Ironman."

Thanks Portech - I appreciate the input. I am leaning toward the Argon based on yours and others input. It's amazing the potions out there. One can easily reach paralysis by analysis I would think. That's very helpful. Best of luck.

I'm 6'0 and (uhh..hum) about 190 at the moment. Long story... I just got an Argon 18 e-112 last week and LOVE it. Never been on anything so stable. My old bike (Kestrel Talon) would wobble like hell within seconds of sitting up hands-free. I could ride all damn day with no hands on this bike. Also, being a larger guy (as far as this forum and triathletes go) the frame is the stiffest thing I have ever seen. You cannot flex it period. Look at how deep the seat / chain stays and bottom bracket area are. I have been without a tri bike for 3 months, really had poor training in general and I'm fat as hell at the moment. Yet, after 2 rides before my race this past weekend I was able to average 22.1 mph for a 40K. Now it was by no means an easy course and most folks would laugh at that pace in this forum, but I can tell you, that is pretty fast for me even when I was in good shape.

I've never been on the Felt bikes, but they look great and I hear mostly good feedback. Only negatives I have heard deal with seat posts and the Bayonet front end. I don't think you can go wrong with any of these. But I love my Argon and have no regrets with the purchase. Especially after this past weekend. Fastest guy on the course was only 4 mins faster than me on the bike.

Pay attention to the differences in fit based upon your body geometry, comfort and ability to generate power in that position. That should impact your decision more than anything else.

---

ADW

All the bikes you are looking at are good. This has been said many, many times, fit first. Whichever fits you better is the answer. I have E112 and love it. Never ridden any Felt bikes, but all are good. Can't go wrong based on the brand, but you can make a mistake with fit.

the most aero one is better, make it fit with stems and seatposts


just to you know, be argumentative =)

of course the catch is, if bike X is the most aero and you need 3 inches of spacers to make it fit, it might not be the most aero anymore

let that bake yer noodle for a while

---

---

Kat Hunter reports on the San Dimas Stage Race from inside the GC winning team
Aeroweenie.com -Compendium of Aero Data and Knowledge
Freelance sports & outdoors writer Kathryn Hunter

Thanks for the input - I am riding a semi-upgraded S32 now, and so consider the Felt by default. Sounds like the E112 is more aero and stable - haven't found any weight for either frameset. I have decided to simply buy the frame, and build it with the components off my S32, DA, Carbon Profile bars, SLK cranks and Cane Creek training wheels - I have a ton of stems. Seems like a waste to sell it, then buy all the same (or worse than) components spec'd to the frame I want. So I guess it is B12 frame (which apparently is a B2 in disguise) or the E112 frame. I'll have everything I need, or some spare cash for an upgrade here or there. Argon is $2349 and the Felt is $1799. I have Mavic 2009 Ksyrium Elite wheels for racing (better than TTR2 and better than the spec'd wheel on a 3700 E112.

Thanks for the help - to all - it really helps.

Andy

I don't know for sure but I would bet large sums of money that the felt is more aero than the E112. There is nothing about the argon that appears to be aero at all.

the b12 on the other hand is rappstar approved, and he doesn't mess around, and crushes bike course records =)

but then so does torbjorn but he gets paid a lot to ride his argon =)

---

---

Kat Hunter reports on the San Dimas Stage Race from inside the GC winning team
Aeroweenie.com -Compendium of Aero Data and Knowledge
Freelance sports & outdoors writer Kathryn Hunter

Last I checked... your aforementioned bike monsters only approved the DA and E-114. =)

yeah but the tubing shapes are more or less the same on each.

so they each get trickle down approval

and, I wouldn't go so far as to say torbjorn "approves" of the aero qualities of his argon.

maybe he does, but he hasn't said so =)

---

---

Kat Hunter reports on the San Dimas Stage Race from inside the GC winning team
Aeroweenie.com -Compendium of Aero Data and Knowledge
Freelance sports & outdoors writer Kathryn Hunter

better not be anybody laughing at 22mph averages held for over an hour...if so, they're liars or braggards...

---

"you know, aero trumps training ;-) "
R10C 10/09

So the tables have turned. I came across a 2008 Argon 18 Mercury - and for cheap. It's new, old stock - with the money saved I can buy some race wheels - Mavic Cosmic Carbone SL. So what we have is: Argon E112 with Ksyrium Elites, or Mercury with Carbone SL's. I might do it. Any thoughts?

merucyr with hed jet front and disc cover rear

cheaper and faster than the carbones
=)

---

---

Kat Hunter reports on the San Dimas Stage Race from inside the GC winning team
Aeroweenie.com -Compendium of Aero Data and Knowledge
Freelance sports & outdoors writer Kathryn Hunter

I love when people go out and make statements like this and slowtwich is known for this. I would not dare say which bike is more aero unless I had firm, factual data from wind tunel testing on both bikes and than add a rider to it for true interface frame/rider.
I am a pilot by profession and have been dealing with practical aspects of aerodynamics every day for the last 19 years of my career. Put on the side the fact that Air Force Academy that I graduated from provided me with 3 years of engineering level aerodynamics classes. I still don't dare making a statement which bike is more aero.

I vote that you go with the Mercury and spend the money on the best race wheels you can buy with your remaining cash. The only thing to keep in mind is that the Mercury has a shallower seat angle than the other bikes you're considering. It has a 76 degree seat angle versus the 78 degree achievable angles on the E112 and the felt. I have the Mercury and a steeper seat angle is only achievable with a zero setback seat post or a fast forward seat post. If you ride steep it may not be the bike for you. You can see my Mercury in my profile, the picture is old and I have since changed the seat post to a zero setback with the saddle slammed all the way forward to achieve a steeper angle. Also make sure you're buying the right size since the seat post is partially "integrated." Don't forget to post pictures no matter what bike you choose to satisfy the bike nerds in all of us.

I ride the B-12 and she rides very nice. I am 6-3 190. Fit was the main reason I went with the Felt. I have a little longer torso and the top tube on the felt was a tad longer than other bikes I tried. First race is Sunday with new 808 clydesdale tubulars. I dont think I am left with too many excuses now.

Bought the Mercury - this will be a huge improvement over my ALU felt from 2006. I bought the Carbone SL's as well as these are what the owner was offering to move out. Now I am building it up and ordering parts. Will post pic to my profile when complete - 2 weeks or so. I sold the felt in 10 minutes on ebay - fastest auction ever. I had no idea there would be a market for that frame. Thanks for everyone's input.

J-dub did ya up right.

Welcome to the ever growing Argon 18 family in KC.

---

ADW

hey atasic,

that is why I said "I don't know for sure"

if you are not ok with me putting out a guess, when i clearly state it as a guess.... well, I think you just wanted to gripe about ST really, right?

=)

---

---

Kat Hunter reports on the San Dimas Stage Race from inside the GC winning team
Aeroweenie.com -Compendium of Aero Data and Knowledge
Freelance sports & outdoors writer Kathryn Hunter

I have an 09' Felt B12, I came from an 06', I think it was, Felt S32. The difference was huge for me. I'm not going to qualify for Kona just bc of the bike, but it is a much better ride. More responsive, much easier to get up to speed from a stop. I'm very happy with it. I have heard about problems with the bayonet system, but since the B12 doesn't have it I can't comment with any kind knowledge on that. I would certainly recommend the B12 for you.

Went for the first ride on the new Argon build which I finished this week (still using temp. Der. hanger - frame came without!) and took 2 minutes off my SMP loop - that was my warm up lap too - following laps were marred by slow cars and minor chain mishap. Still crushed previous times. That frame is stupid stiff - I love it. See you on the road. I put a few pics in my profile.