I’m curious on peoples take on any major differences with the P3 in the past years (2016, 2015, 2014, 2013 maybe) ? I was in the LBS today and it sounded like there wasn’t much if any difference between the 2015 and 2016 frame? Big differences in years past?
I’m looking to purchase a new bike as my former was a very bad fit for me and a bike fitter I’ve used mentioned the P3 would be a great bike for me with the adjustments that can be made all around the bike to fit it perfect. I’d assume he was talking about a new P3(he doesn’t sell bikes so no playing favorites).
As previous poster said, there are basically two frames. The older frame which some folk refer to as the P3C, which ran to about 2012/2013, and then the newer frame which some folk call the NP3. Different designs as per the above picture, notably the deeper section headtube area, taller top tube with a flat upper surface, less obvious curve around the rear wheel (although it still fairs the wheel very well). Less obvious is the way the fork crown interfaces with the downtube, which is probably a nice aero touch. Functional differences are few, but there are bolt bosses on the top tube where you can mount a suitable bento box like the Darkspeedworks or Torhans Aerobento. Cable routing is a bit neater on the newer model (although you can duplicate that on the older bike with a drill, if you have the balls).
Even less obvious to the naked eye, and far far more important, is the difference in geometry. The P3C was a classically “long and low” geometry frameset. Meaning that for any given reach, you get less stack than some of its contemporaries. In layman’s terms, that means the bars are lower and the stretch is longer. A recent (and in the opinion of many, unfortunate) design trend with modern bike manufacturers is to provide “taller” geometry, that is the frame will position the bars in a taller position for any given amount of stretch. This can be overcome to a point through careful selection of front end components (bars, pads, stem) and the way you set that up, but in some cases it is simply easier on a “long and low” frameset because you have aerobar designs available which allow you to easily add pad stack anyway, but I digress…
Apologies if this is more depth than you wanted, but the point is that the older and newer frames offer different fit characteristics. For example, if you compare my size P3 which is a 56 the bike I have (older model P3C) has frame stack and reach 516mm and 433mm. The nearest size NP3 in terms of reach is the 58 which is 437mm, but comes with a whopping 559mm of stack. This is over 5cm taller, which is a world of difference in terms of bike fit. I can size down to the 56 for 425mm of reach but I still get 540mm of frame stack. The new bike is very “tall”.
Your fitter will hopefully understand this, but you need to be clear from him which “P3” he is recommending, because it makes a lot of difference.
Thank you both… and knighty76, the more indepth the better as far as I’m concerned. I appreciate all the details. I’d read in other posts about the ‘long and low’ of the older versions like an 08 p3 even, but the added detail was very helpful and it all gives me more to research.
Cool, although I just realized that 559mm minus 516mm isn’t 5cm at all, but you get my drift…!
Good luck, both really nice bikes. But finally let me say this - if I was looking at the new P3, I’d probably buy the P2 instead and spend the difference on upgrades (maybe Tririg Alpha X bars)! Basically, it is the same bike apart from a slightly different fork.
Thanks. Good to know. At the risk of getting grief for hijacking the OP’s thread, are there tri bikes out there (current models) that are more similar to the old Cervelo geometry than are the current Cervelos?
