I was looking at the Felt 2011 lineup and at the B12 and B14 in particular. Now it seems that the B14 is equivalent or better but it is the lower pricepoint. The B12 has Sram Red and the R2C shifters, which is nice, but the B14 is Dura Ace and almost a full pound lighter even with the schmaltzy Vision crankset and eight more spokes. Am I missing something?
http://www.feltbicycles.com/USA/2011/TT-TRI/TT-TRI-Series/B12.aspx
http://www.feltbicycles.com/USA/2011/TT-TRI/TT-TRI-Series/B14.aspx
Well, do exercise some caution when using the manufacturer’s weights as a golden BB metric. I weigh a lot of what we review here in my job and- often through no intentional fault of the manufacturer/distributor the weights of a production example or a different size are different in either direction.
Also- I caution using any one single metric as a make or break metric for buying a bike. Consider all the things that will influence your ownership experience: most prominantly bike fit.
That said- nice bikes this year as with every year.
Also- I caution using any one single metric as a make or break metric for buying a bike. Consider all the things that will influence your ownership experience: most prominantly bike fit.
The OP was asking about the same exact frame/same exact fit bike, but just different specs and the reason behind that. He didn’t ask anything about bike fit in his post.
Well, do exercise some caution when using the manufacturer’s weights as a golden BB metric. I weigh a lot of what we review here in my job and- often through no intentional fault of the manufacturer/distributor the weights of a production example or a different size are different in either direction.
Also- I caution using any one single metric as a make or break metric for buying a bike. Consider all the things that will influence your ownership experience: most prominantly bike fit.
That said- nice bikes this year as with every year.
Indeed, I have done all my research, was fitted (well, measured on a fitcycle) and have a list of numbers and potential bikes in my sweaty hands. Felt bikes are on the list and the two stated models fall into the price range. I am just curious if there is anything material between the two bikes other than the price.
i just published the B12 product review on the main site earlier this morning.
there is nothing i can find that accounts for a pound difference between these bikes. the crank on the B14 might be lighter, because the crank on the B12 is a SRAM S300 GXP crank with SRAM Red chainrings. that might conspire, as a set, to weigh a little more than the FSA crank. but very little.
this year’s fork is 40g heavier than last year’s, but that’s a new fork on both models. otherwise, these are pretty similar bikes, other than shift systems.
what’s kind of heavy, frankly, on the B12 is the all-aluminum set of devox aerobar parts: pursuit bar, extensions and pad mounts. i can see this outweighing the cheaper, downscaled round tubed base bar and accompanying mounts. but it seems to me that these two bikes share the same aerobar system, and you have to go to the B16 to get the cheaper aerobar.
btw, while the aluminum devox system is a bit on the heavy side, i still really like this aerobar and it’s worth the weight (or you can upscale to the carbon pursuit bar, extensions and/or brackets).
it is my guess that you’ll like the shifting on the b12 better than on the b14, mostly because SRAM just shifts better for timed racing (excluding Di2). but that’s mostly a function of the shifters.
What perfect timing…I was just checking out Felt’s web site on this very bike. Very intelligent spec. I bet it goes on dealer allocation soon. Got me thinking that maybe bikes are getting less expensive given what I paid for a new a new bike just a few years ago. I suppose this frame mold has been long since paid for so they can maintain gross margins while upping group spec.
i just published the B12 product review on the main site earlier this morning.
there is nothing i can find that accounts for a pound difference between these bikes. the crank on the B14 might be lighter, because the crank on the B12 is a SRAM S300 GXP crank with SRAM Red chainrings. that might conspire, as a set, to weigh a little more than the FSA crank. but very little.
this year’s fork is 40g heavier than last year’s, but that’s a new fork on both models. otherwise, these are pretty similar bikes, other than shift systems.
what’s kind of heavy, frankly, on the B12 is the all-aluminum set of devox aerobar parts: pursuit bar, extensions and pad mounts. i can see this outweighing the cheaper, downscaled round tubed base bar and accompanying mounts. but it seems to me that these two bikes share the same aerobar system, and you have to go to the B16 to get the cheaper aerobar.
btw, while the aluminum devox system is a bit on the heavy side, i still really like this aerobar and it’s worth the weight (or you can upscale to the carbon pursuit bar, extensions and/or brackets).
it is my guess that you’ll like the shifting on the b12 better than on the b14, mostly because SRAM just shifts better for timed racing (excluding Di2). but that’s mostly a function of the shifters.
An enlightening article. I’m of course hoping the next one is about the B14.
I was looking at the Felt 2011 lineup and at the B12 and B14 in particular. Now it seems that the B14 is equivalent or better but it is the lower pricepoint. The B12 has Sram Red and the R2C shifters, which is nice, but the B14 is Dura Ace and almost a full pound lighter even with the schmaltzy Vision crankset and eight more spokes. Am I missing something?
http://www.feltbicycles.com/…-TRI-Series/B12.aspx
http://www.feltbicycles.com/…-TRI-Series/B14.aspx]
I place weight on about 1/20th of the importance vs. aerodynamics. Certainly a round tube basic base bar is going to be lighter than what goes into the contruction of the Bayonet bars on the B10/12/14 bikes. These bars are more expensive that just about anything I can buy from Profile or Vision. A Syntace base bar and clip on could save you as much as 400g if you weren’t concerned with adjustability or added drag.
I need a little help with this adjective: schmaltzy Vision crankset
When sourcing cranksets for triathlon bikes the last 5 years I’ve asked many of our vendors for a compact crankset w/ aero chainrings available in both standard (53/39t) and compact (50/34t) sizes. I feel this crankset is the holy grail of functionality from an OE perspective on a TT/Tri bike. Again, you could find a crankset that is a bit lighter, but more versatile? I can’t think of one. What would be your dream crankset specification for this B12 bike? I wish they made a carbon version, too for the B2!
The biggest difference in terms of cost on these two bikes is the shifters, crankset, and brakes (excluding the rear).
Like Dan has said, the R2C functions unlike any other mechanically operated bar-end option, so if that is something you prefer, opt for the B12. If you are satisfied with the traditional shifting on the B12 (and every other Shimano/Campy equipped TT/Tri bike) pick the B14. The other small details are just that. Small.
-SD
one thing that i omitted mention in my review, because i did not know the answer. the SRAM crankset on the B12, is it 110mm bolt pattern? this seems to me to be what you’re saying you prefer, regardless of the chainrings spec’d OE.
one thing that i omitted mention in my review, because i did not know the answer. the SRAM crankset on the B12, is it 110mm bolt pattern? this seems to me to be what you’re saying you prefer, regardless of the chainrings spec’d OE.
SRAM has not offered both TT chainrings and 110mm B.C.D.
In the case of the B12, I chose the performance of the SRAM RED level shifting/chainrings as well as the aero benefit over the utility of 110mm BCD. Of course with a rear derailleur swap you can mate those 53/39t chainrings with an 11-32t for the hills. You don’t have that option with Shimano road rear derailleurs.
-SD
Well now I’ve been busted saying something stupid. I used the term schmaltzy for the cranks because they seemed like an afterthought added on for the purpose of price alone. Your response is something I had not considered.
I appreciate the response.
I was shopping for a bike for my wife and decided on the B14. Started a thread on that topic, including some consideration for the Trek 7 series (link.) Below is the final comparison of the components used on these two bikes (B12 and B14) based on getting on a trainer in the store only.
First the shifting:
B14: The MicroSHIFT shifters work well with the Dura Ace derailleurs on this bike. Right shifter is quite lite action. Easy and fast, low effort. The left one is not indexed, but is ratcheted. I think indexing for the front derailleur just gets in the way. If you think about the intermediate index points required for trimming the FD, and also consider Di2 has their auto-trim feature, it seems to be kinda silly to have indexing for any FD (except Di2.)
B12: The SRAM R2C shifters on the B12 provided more tactile feedback, sort of a sense that something complex is happening in the shifter under your control. But these shifters also require more effort. In particular shifting the FD to the large chain ring requires concerted wrist yanking and more concentration than I feel should be necessary.
The SRAM Red shifters may be more durable in the long run (and for sure will be more aero) than the MicroSHIFT shifters. But in my judgment, the B12 does not really shift better than the B14 overall, when you consider both the front and rear shifting.
Overall, here is my take on the main difference between the B12 and the B14 WRT components:
Function of the shifters definitely differs as described above.Shifters on the B12 are SRAM Red compared to MicroSHIFT on the B14 (an increment of about $165 based on mail-order component price.)B14 cranks can be converted to compact because they are 110 BCD, but B12 cranks have more large chain ring upgrade options right now.
Cranks on B12 are SRAM TT compared to Vision on the B14. The chain rings on the B12 have SRAM written all over them which looks kinda cool. Both are aero. Not sure about whether either is forged.
Derailleurs on B12 are SRAM Red compared to Dura Ace on the B14. Both are premium quality, SRAM with better marketing and fancier materials.
Brake handles on B12 are SRAM Red, which are more aero but less comfortable than the generic ones on the B14.
Spokes on B12 are black fully bladed whereas they are white oval ones on the B14 (I prefer oval based on Zipp research.)Tires on B12 are white Vittoria Zaffiro Pro whereas the are black Vittoria Rubino on the B14. I think the Rubino is more expensive.
Calipers on B12 are SRAM branded, but they are unbranded on the B14.Looks like the value on the B14 is great, in my opinion. Very balanced components. It will be interesting to see how the shifters hold up.
Update: Wife likes that bike and it sure made her faster compared to the road bike she had.
We live in San Francisco Bay area and she is training for IronMan Canada. She is fixated on getting better gearing. Here is what came stock: 52/38 front, 12-25 rear. the Vision cranks are 110 BCD, so we have these options:
Swap to a 12-27 rear cassette
Lowest gear goes from 40.1 inches to 37.1 inches (8.1% lower)
Swap to compact (50/34) front chain-rings
Lowest gear goes from 40.1 inches to 35.9 inches (11.7% lower) but highest gear is 50/12 (109.9 inches)
Swap to compact (50/34) front chain-rings and swap to 11-25 rear cassette
Lowest gear goes from 40.1 inches to 35.9 inches (11.7% lower) and highest gear is 50/11 (plenty high)
Swap to 36T front inner chain-ring
Lowest gear goes from 40.1 inches to 38 inches (5.5% lower) and front shifting probably gets a bit dodgy 'cause of the 52 to 36 tooth jump.Guess I will eliminate #4 above because it appears to give limited benefit and has a shifting performance cost.
Any suggestions about which is best among the remaining three alternatives? She likes to ride down hills fast, to that might eliminate option #2. On the other hand, maybe it is a good idea to just avoid such a high gear on a tri-bike to protect life and limb…?
Tom
#3 is the all around winner. It will keep her smiling in all conditions.
I had these cranks (Vision 52/38) put on my new Cervelo P2. I went with an 11-28 cassette. There are some gearing calculators online that let you compare cranks with different cassettes. It help me visualize the differences (e.g. 50/34 with 12-25 vs 52/38 with 11-28). Last year I had a 50/34 with both cassettes and I hardly ever put the 12-25 back on. But then again I prefer to sit and spin up hills. Good luck!
Stevepdx, which brand 11-28 cassette did you pick? And which rear derailieur do you have? How is the rear shifting?
The Vision cranks really look nice so it would be a shame to have to substitute some other chain rings.
Excellent tool here:
http://public.tableausoftware.com/views/bikegears/CompareBicycleGearing
.
The gear calculator tool linked by LuckyMe is the one I used.
I believe the cassette is ultegra. The fd and rd are ultegra and Cervelo comes with a stock 12-25 ultegra, but I asked the shop to swap for an 11-28. I trust the shop wouldn’t have made the swaps if they thought there would be issues.
I haven’t ridden the bike outside but based on my experience with 50/34 fsa cranks, 105 rd and 11-28 ultegra cassette last season (with even bigger gaps since it was 9-speed), it worked great for my hillier triathlons. The gear calculator above also visually shows the spacing gaps between, so that should help also, if that’s your concern.
I decided to go ahead and change the chainrings to compact (50/34T) and the cassette as well. I could not find any online source for the appropriate FSA chainrings to specify, so I ended up calling them and got good support. Here are FSA Super type rings I got:
370-0250Q (50T)
370-0234K (34T)
