As some of you know, I had a crash last week in which my Guru trilite was totally destroyed. The owner of my LBS Ian Fraser (sub 10 hour dude at IM LP last year), leant my his Soloist, to hold me over until I get a replacement ride. Back in 1996, Ian Fraser was the first Profressional Triathlete sponsored by Cervelo, riding their original P2, to victories in Muskoka etc (www.cyclelogik.com).
First of all, let me share some specs from my Guru.
I ride a 51, with the nose of my saddle 2.5 cm ahead of my BB with a saddle height of 68.5 cm from centre off BB to top of saddle. If you do the theta = arcsin(12/68.5) on this you get a seat angle of 79 degrees (where 12 is half the length of saddle minus distance ahead of BB).
My “reach” is 48 cm from the nose of the saddle to the centre of the base bar clamp on my stem.
I had a 10 cm drop from nose of saddle to top of aero pad. Finally, the rear centre on the trilite was 39.5 cm. On the Soloist it is 39.9 cm, which is pretty tight of a road bike and actually tighter than many tribikes including some with poorly designed cutouts.
I got the Soloist and tried to set it up the same way as the Guru trilite. I had a couple of problems. The fork was cut to a minimal height, so I had to go with almost 13 cm of drop. The Front centre of the Soloist is 2 cm shorter than the trilite, so the front end is “tighter” especially when riding aero. Ideally, I would need a 13 cm long stem rather than the 11 cm stem that I had.
I expected that the bike would handle somewhat “squirrly” with the seat that far forward (79 degrees) on a bike designed around a 73 angle. I have ridden many road bikes with the seat up beyond 76 and they were scary on corners and downhills.
Anyway, with the Soloist this was not the case. I used it to climb Whiteface Mtn in Lake Placid (13 K, 3600 ft of climbing) and it worked great with some treaks (initially had the nose down and levelled it off which worked better). As a point of reference for some reason, I tend to climb quicker when I ride slightly steep. 79 degrees is good for tris, but for a one hour sustained climb, I would likely go more like 76 which is what I did when riding the likes of Alpe d’Huez and Ventoux last summer.
On the descents, over 80 kph the Soloist handled solid as a rock. I had full confidence with the bike. It felt like an extension of my body. I was absolutely amazed by how well it handed road vibration, especially with the seat jacked that far forward. All I can attribute this to is the circular stays which from an engineering perspective are a good shape to deal with axial loads. Riding on the flats, I could ride right though potholes without feeling like I would launch my body over the bars.
This is the first Road bike in my 18 years of riding with aerobars that still handles properly when ridden at >76 degrees.
I am stongly considering getting a Soloist as a replacement bike, mainly cause it works as a tri bike, but then I could also set it up a bit slacker as a road bike the next time I go riding in the Alpes in Europe :-).
I would like to get the other comments from Soloist owners.
Being an engineer that does technical marketing myself, I tend to take any marketing claims with a grain of salt, even from someone as credible as Gerard :-). In this case, I bow to the master Vroomen himself. This bike is a technical miracle of sorts. How does this road bike handle so well as a tri bike with so little road shock from an aluminium bike.
I have to strongly reconsider my thoughts of dropping lots of coin to upgrade to a carbon tri bike.
On that note I have a question from P2K and P3 owners. How do those bikes handle road shock ? While I am leaning towards a Soloist, I am also entertaining the P2K or P3. If they have a sweet ride like the Soloist, coupled with the 36.6 cm seat stay, then they could be an option. Something tells me the shorter 36.6 stay means more road vibration (ie shorter lever).
or are you referring to handling?