Cervelo S5 as Road and Tri Bike?

Triathlon Forum
1

Hi. I realise that this particular conversation has been done before (in part) but I’m interested in opinions on my thinking.

I have a 58 P2C, I’m 6’4" with relatively long legs and a shorter torso. I ride it steep and low, it’s steep (saddle pushed far forward) because the TT is too long. I’ve even put a 90mm stem onto the bike to bring my elbows under my shoulders. I ride the bike with low aerobars (HED), no spacers and a low-rise headset cap. I’ve raced the bike at IM Austria and Powerman Zofingen and my shoulders and neck can cope. My taint goes numb after a while though (I’m experimenting with saddles).

Anyway, my P2C is getting on a bit and it’s a bit bashed, so I was thinking about replacing it. I’m also thinking it’s time to get a new road bike, since my current frame is 8 years old, aluminium and very stiff and uncompromising. It’s a 58cm frame as well, and I generally ride that quite steep (zero offset post) with low-ish bars, though the head tube is quite long.

So, here’s my thinking. If I was to replace the road bike with an S5, I’d get a 58. The numbers are fairly similar, the stack is much the same (605) and the reach is much the same (my road bike is 15mm longer but I ride with a zero offset post so I’m not too stretched out). If I was to replace the P2C, I’d be better off getting a specific tri bike frame.

But, I can’t really afford to replace both frames and most of the racing I do (particularly in 2012) are on course where a road bike with tri bars could be a good option - long, steep climbs; technical descents; twisty, narrow roads.

So, would I be able to run a 56 S5 as a tri bike, whilst still being able to ride it effectively as a road bike? Here’s some numbers:

Road bike
Stack 610 Reach 410 TT 580 HT 225 SO 860 Stem 110

P2C
Stack 550 Reach 440 TT 560 HT 160 SO 815 Stem 90

S5 58
Stack 605 Reach 396 TT 581 HT 206 SO 815

S5 56
Stack 580 Reach 387 TT 564 HT 179 SO 784

If I went with the 58 S5, it would work great as a road bike, I’d put a 100 stem on it, add a small 5cm spacer and ride the frame with the saddle in the setback position and it’d fit fine, I think. As a tri bike, even though I probably don’t need to be really low or steep on it - I just want to not be too stretched out, I could probably get my elbows under my shoulders by using the forward seat position and using tri bars that allow the my elbows to come further back from the bars (e.g. USE Tula). I also like to ride with my hands up, which brings my elbows a bit lower along with a -17deg stem. In all likelihood, I’m going to be at least 3-4cm higher than I am on my 58 P2C.

If I went with the 56 S5, I could make it work as a tri bike in a couple of different configurations. Seat forward, low stem, I think I could get a similar position to my P2C. For a technical, hilly course, easy enough to raise the front end a bit. Am I compromising the handling though? As a road bike, it’s not too much shorter than my current frame, using the setback position on the S5 would make it work. Is it too low though? The stack is 3cm shorter than my current bike, I’m not sure I really want 3cm of spacers, so I’d use an upturned stem, I would guess.

So, the dilemma is this. A 58 S5 would be a perfect replacement for my road bike but wouldn’t be easy to make work as a tri bike. A 56 S5 could be made to work as a tri bike (particularly for the racing I want to do next year) but is maybe just going to be too low (or ugly) in the front end to work as a road bike. However, if it could work as a road bike, it’d be pretty versatile and would mean I could help finance it by selling my P2C (if I get a 58 S5, I think I’d have to keep my P2C).

Of course, it’d be ideal if I could ride both a 56 and a 58 to see how they are but there are no Cervelo dealers near me and it’ll be the New Year before my chosen dealer has 56s for me to look at and I can get down there to get a fitting. In the meantime, I’m kicking ideas around.

So, what are your thoughts? Am I barking up the wrong tree?

Thanks.

2

Apologies for the long, rambling post.

3

aero wise, the s5 is great. more aero than your p2

you have identified the main challenge, which is stack height.

also if you put drop bars and sti shifters on the s5 that is eating up a LOT of drag

another challenge is the forward seat position on the s5 is not as forward as the s3/s2 was. You would have to choose seats carefully to get a steep seat angle out of it. then you do that and it won’t handle as good as the p2 in your aero position…

just keep the p2! =)

4

I’m thinking that I’ll put road bars on when I’m on a course with technical descending (I hate steep descents on my P2C when I’m out of aero) and aerobars on when I’m doing a course where it’s less technical and I can stay in the aero bars most of the time. I’ve been over 50mph in the aero bars (at Zofingen) on my P2C but only when I knew the descent had a long run out.

Using Ultegra Di2 should make it easier to swap front ends, I hope.

5

Let’s say I wasn’t going to replace the P2C, but I just wanted a new road bike which I could also use for hilly, technical courses, with clip-on aero bars. I’ve no doubt the S5 would be the most aero choice. If I could make the 56 work as a road bike, then that’d be ideal, I guess. The 58 would have me dangling in the wind.

6

this idea that using a road frame is somehow better for hilly/technical tri courses is, I think, totally wrong.

If you are setting up the road frame to something close to your tri position, then the road frame will handle worse than the tri frame on these technical courses.

in fact on technical courses, if anything you can go more aggressive with your aero position since you will get a break from it during the turns and steep hills =)

7

There’s something in that, certainly.

On a technical route, with steep descending, would I prefer to be on my road bike or my tri bike? No question, road bike. But, why? Maybe it’s simply because it’s not as low. On the other hand, I’d tend to ride my road bike in the drops down steep descents, so I’m going to be just as low. So, thinking about it, I realise that the reason I hate descending on my tri bike is the terrible braking performance I have at the moment. Dead, carbon brake levers (Cane Creek); tight cable bends (through the aero bars); carbon wheels.

So, if I can get better braking performance, I’d feel more comfortable. Believe me though, I’ve tried. Anyone recommend some good quality, brake levers? Preferably with spring return.

Third brake lever helps enormously though (for less steep descents). Someone should invent a 3rd brake lever that’ll work with Di2.

8

I should probably take my tri bike up to the course (far north of Scotland) and give it a shot, to see if it’s doable. If I can ride my tri bike rather than a road bike, I’d have an advantage, I’m sure.

9

What type of riding or racing do you put a priority on? If its road riding and racing get the bigger S5, use the P2 for non technical tris, and you can try to put clip on on the S5 for technical races, if it isn’t to your liking you can go back to the P2.

Keep in mind fit and postion is largely going to determine which bike is fastest.

10

Definitely. I spent a long time fitting myself on my P2C, replacing all sorts of parts until it worked.

Ideally, I’d just replace the P2C frame with something with similar numbers (I was looking at the QR Illicito) and replace my road frame with the 58 S5. And then make the choice whenever I needed to. Maybe I’ll just get a 58 S5 and squeeze another year or two out of the P2C. My “need” for a new road frame probably outweighs my need for a new tri frame.

Thanks all.

11

FWIW, I worry way more about gettig the reach proper as that effects handling. Stack can be lowered any number of ways if you are creative. I have a friend who only rides a tandem and only as the stoker. He has his own tandem and made his own adjustable stem to accomadate all sorts of captains. It can go about 10cm above or below level.

12

Yep, bikes should be sized according to TT/reach (hard to adjust) rather than ST/stack (easier to adjust).

I think I’m back to looking at replacing my aging P2C frame and just trying to get good braking performance out of it (and riding it a touch higher for hilly courses). And then I’ll get a new road frame (58 S5 is top of the list right now, or maybe a Foil - love the look of that frame) when I have the means.

I’m sure I’ll change my mind again before I lay down the cash!

13

Why are you having braking performance issues with the p2? It shouldn’t be any different than a road bike.

Why go higher for hillier courses? you spend less time in aero, you could go lower!

the only thing that is important for technical courses is a basebar with brakes in a comfy position for braking, climbing, and handling, imho.

14

I think my braking sucks for 2 reasons - crappy brake levers, Cane Creek carbon numbers with no return spring. And very tight bends through my vantage 8 base bars. I just don’t get very positive feedback from them. It’s made worse when I’m on the carbon wheels. I use the HED 3rd brake lever too, and the direct cable through the splitter comes from the 3rd lever, which makes the main lever even mushier. If I make the main lever go direct to the brake, then the 3rd lever has no power at all.

I use Gore cables.

Recommendations for a decent brake lever? With a return spring? A nice solid, stiff feeling lever.

I think I’d go a bit higher for hilly courses just so that I’m a bit more comfortable sitting up on the brakes when I’m descending. I have a very big drop to my bars at the moment (being a freaky size and shape). But, yep, it’s probably not really necessary.

Cheers.

15

Because when you are going downhill your center of gravity is pushed farther forward on an alread forward position. By moving up you COG move back and handling and braking improves by being better balanced between the wheels.

Look at DH Mtbers, they are in a very high position and braking and handling are at a premium.

16

Why are you having braking performance issues with the p2? It shouldn’t be any different than a road bike.
Why go higher for hillier courses? you spend less time in aero, you could go lower!
the only thing that is important for technical courses is a basebar with brakes in a comfy position for braking, climbing, and handling, imho.

I used to have the same thinking, but my friends who completed IM France have convinced me otherwise. A very technical course and their were many crashes throughout the ride. My friend described it as too dangerous to be in the drops on the descents because of all the tight turns and too steep on the climbs that aero would be a benefit.

There are occasions that a road bike could be the more practical choice!

17

The most technical course I’ve done is the TTT HIM, steep hills, curvy descents, crappy roads, dogs. I’ve always used a tribike with particularly poor braking. I got through it but it would’ve been more fun and certainly safer on a roadbike. somewhat of a tossup as far as time I think.

18

Yep, if you spend more time on the base bars, than in aero, then a road bike is a better choice. Luckily there aren’t too many courses where you have to choose. A tri bike is balanced to handle properly when you are aero. As a result, your weight distribution isn’t right when you are sitting up.

You can ride a tri bike down steep hills, just not very quickly (relative to a well-fit road bike) or comfortably. One of the reasons for getting a third brake lever - you can stay in the most balanced, well-handling position for longer.

19

Jack is right in one respect, certainly. If you were to size down a road bike to make it possible to get aero, then that compromises the handling, since you’d tip too much weight over the front wheel and combined with the trail on road bike, the wheel would be too far back and the steering would be too quick and unpredictable.

Whether or not that’d happen to me on a 56 S5? Maybe, maybe not. Expensive gamble, I guess.

20

Thats why its best to use a RB as a road bike and a tri bike as a tri bike. Neither will be unrideable when used for the other appliction, but they wont be optimal either.

If someone is on a very limited budget compromise is neccesary, but you have other bikes and are looking at new expensive bikes. Having 2-3 bikes and none of them being “right” isn’t a position you should put your self in.