I think they'd have market even if it "may be" lighter. I'm sure the average weight is 100 gms lighter than the average painted bike. So, you are still ahead if you are a gram counter.

Can you feel 100 grams on a bike?

-SD

---

https://www.kickstarter.com/...bike-for-the-new-era

As a Cervelo owner I don't understand why the buzz isn't all about the new Softride based upon the aero testing. 82 seconds faster than a P3 over 40 kms. Whooooaaah!

You don't have to get the P3...

Because I did!

There is more to a bike than wieght.

---

customerjon @gmail.com is where information happens.

you know, the real reason people would buy more P3 SL over regular P3's is that the anodized black looks so much better than the grey, yellow, and red/white team colors. In fact, I dream about my next bike being a P3SL...hopefully sooner than later...or get a used P3 cheap of Ebay and get it repaited.

---

�The greater danger for most of us is not that our aim is too high and we miss it, but that it is too low and we reach it.� -Michelangelo

MoodBoost Drink : Mood Support + Energy.

Well, that would have been another point, and the answer is no. You say "yes"?! Ok, can you feel the difference when your body weight fluctuates 100g up or down? Hell no.

And then the aero-thing, what with riders like Lindquist, Kraft, Hellriegel et. al riding round-tubed frames and dominating bike splits and all, it's got to get you to realize the oft-repeated mantra of "it's the motor, not the bike".

Another reason not to get it ;-)







Of course there it, but weight and anodizing is what Cervelo touted.

THATS the genius, with a new finish, whats old is new again. Kudos to their brilliance.

All of those winning riders would be faster on more aerodynamic bikes.

Are you arguing that they wouldn't? Or that it doesn't matter to their victory.

Do you think it matters to Chris Hoy?

-SD

---

https://www.kickstarter.com/...bike-for-the-new-era

Yea, Chris Hoy, the track world champ by .001 seconds. I think aerodynamics mattered to him on that day.

18mm tires? You bet
Aero helmet? Sure
Disc Wheels? No question
Skinsuit? Everyone else does
Shrink wrapping your feet/pedals? I think he was the only one that did that.

Did he win because his feet/pedals were more aerodynamic?

I think those winners you mentioned would be faster, sure. Over 40km could you measure it? sure. Would it make more than a handful of seconds difference? Not likely.

---

https://www.kickstarter.com/...bike-for-the-new-era

Have you seen a team P3 in the flesh. Very sharp. Especially with vision bars and zipps.

In reply to

(I might even argue that an anodized surface is less aerodynamic for that matter.)



Huh? Anodizing ,versus bare, or a painted frame can have nothing to do with the aerodynamic properties of the frame

Styrrell

Have you heard of surface roughness? Or is it paint innocent until proven guilty?

---

-
"Yeah, no one likes a smartass, but we all like stars" - Thom Yorke


smartasscoach.tri-oeiras.com

I have indeed heard of surface roughness. I've spent more time looking at surface profile of bearing suraces than i care to remember. The surface roughness of anodized, bare and painted frames, even down to a sub micron scale can be contolled to whatever you want it to be. In other words surface roughness is not an inherent property of anodized or painted surfaces.

Styrrell

Hoy also most likely has the luxury of a frame that fits him perfectly and is tuned totally to his riding style/wattage/etc.

Aerondynamics mattered to him, for sure. But I bet he was also mighty concerned about getting all of his 1XYZ watts to the pedals as well.

As I like to point out so often, buying a trick aero bike is not as important as buying a frame that fits properly. If your motor can work most effciently, you will be better served than riding on an aero frame.

This isn't to say that can't have an aero bike that fits well. But it might not be as good a fit as a true custom bike, with tubes that fit your power/weight/style/etc., and you may not realize the full potential of the aerodynamic savings due to a lower wattage output.

---

"Non est ad astra mollis e terris via." - Seneca | rappstar.com | FB - Rappstar Racing | IG - @jordanrapp

Hmm, I gotta chime in here as a big Cervelo owner, retailer and believer.

The P3 is solid for a number of reasons in my opinion. It is aero (according to some tests and based on my expereince- which is utterly subjective), has oddly good ride characteristics including comfort and handling and, most importantly to me, is a bike where you can acheive a very high performance posture or position.

Additionally, our experience has been that the bike is mechanically very dependable. We have had absolutely zero frame failures of any kind. The dropouts work well, the frames are consistently in good alignment so the components work well, the aero seatpost clamp is entirely trouble free from our experience (unlike some others from other companies) and the head tube is a standard 1" steer tube, which I like for aero characteristics (that said, I like the Kuota with the massive 1&1/4" lower headset race and 1&1/8" upper race because it is so nice and stiff. Probably not too aero though).

I'm on my 2nd P3. I had a P3 that I set up in a kind of "Bjorn" like position. I didn't care for that position quite predictably but it was a worthwhile fitting experiement. My 2nd P3 is a new P3SL I am building now. I like the matt black appearance. I'm not too concerned if whatever finish they put on it makes it lighter or faster. The original version was plenty fast enough for me.

It's also worth pointing out that the P3 is one of very few bikes used stock by sponsored Tour de France teams in time trial stages. I know how that equipment game works, and that is quite a coup on Cervelo's part. That is extremely unusual in the entire history of the Tour de France.

Mostly though, I ride a lot of very nice bikes often. I ride my own, which I change frequently, and I ride customer's bikes going out the door. I also have to be responsible for the mechanical integrity of a bike that a customer is pinning their hopes for an important race on.

I know, based on our experience in our store and my own personal experience, that a Cervelo P3 is dependable. When I sell one I don't worry.

From a business perspective, the staff at Cervelo are pleasant to work with. They are kind, courteous and professional. They have helped me build my business. They have consistently demonstrated commitment to us and honored that commitment when other vendors have, quite frankly, dicked us around. That also adds value to our relationship with Cervelo and my support of the brand.

To me, that is what the big deal about Cervelo is.

---

Tom Demerly
The Tri Shop.com

OK, you got your Cervelo ass-kissing post in ;-) My post, however, was about how I don't understand all the drooling about a bike that is only claimed to be 100g lighter than it's predecessor.

Tom,

Yer building up a new P3SL (vs. yer "old" regular P3) because you like the color. And of course, because you can, an obviously awesome perk of owning a LBS. ;) (I've had, and still have, only 3 bikes in the last 11 yrs of avid riding - so yes, I'm kinda jealous of those who get new bikes all the time )

But, the original post was asking if there are any true performance gains w/ the P3SL vs. P3 (not whether Cervelo is a good brand or if they make quality bikes, etc. - that seems to be a well known given at this point), other than the *claimed* 100 g difference - so, is there?

I doubt it, but they do look awful stylie, so if it looks faster, and you feel faster, then who is to say that you aren't faster? Often times a new bike will make you "faster" just because you are psyched to ride it, and ride more due to that.



PS - Did you get my message? I wanted to buy some Tri tidbits from yer website, and can't figger out how to do so. Am I missing something?

Ride on-

Mike

---

float , hammer , and jog

It's new (which as superdave alluded, has value in and of itself), costs the same, it was showcased in the TdF, and by far most importantly, it's black.

Scott

Hey Murphy's Law,

Yup, you got a point. I just really like the bike for a number of reasons. But yeah, I hear you.

I didn't see your note. We now use the Qurb spam filter. E-mail senders have to be approved senders or the message goes into a junk box.

I'll look for it.

---

Tom Demerly
The Tri Shop.com

I think a lot of people would actualy prefer the P2K, if they got a chance to test ride it against a P3. I did, and I liked the P2K, so that's what I bought. I felt that way 3 years ago when I bought it, and I ride a couple buddies' P3s every now and then, and I still prefer the P2K.

Funny, but the bike shop guys who set me up also preferred the P2K. They both had one at the time, when they could have had a P3 I'm sure. I was also checking out a P3 at the IMoo expo last year, and the InsideOut bike guy told me he preferred the P2K and would recommend them over the P3 as well.

I'm not knocking the P3 at all. They're both awful nice, but I think the P2K gets talked about a lot less, probably because it doesn't look quite as exotic.

- Big EE

That's 82 seconds in a wind tunnel ;) What's that in the real world?

And SD, I better not be able to tell the difference between 100 grams... I just ordered a "heavy" Renn Disk ;) Otherwise it was wasted money right? (Of course most of the disks out there way about the same)

---

TheBikeRacer.com

People go to bad bike shops or they buy bikes because they look nice or because their friend has one and loves it, etc.

There is a review on Pez of Serottas, and this experienced (although by no means expert) rider gained a 4% increase in power output at the same HR just from being fit properly. 4% is HUGE. I am not saying that is common, but I think it is not uncommon to see 1%+ gains in power just from fit.

And if you consider that it is the rider that accounts for the majority of the drag, then getting a bike where you can get into your most aerodynamic position is going to be much more important than riding a frame that is aero but where you are not at your most aero.

When you add together comfort, power, and body aerodynamics, I think that the real gains in an aero frame are smaller than advertised. Is there some? Sure. But I think a lot of the pros who ride round tubed bikes recognize that the savings in drag are not worth the sacrifices that they would make in other areas.

And when you consider that you have to run afterwards, comfort and fit become more even more important.

I think aero should be a tie-breaker between two frames that fit equally well, not the primary consideration.

---

"Non est ad astra mollis e terris via." - Seneca | rappstar.com | FB - Rappstar Racing | IG - @jordanrapp