Does anybody have any opinions in regards to these two bikes. I’m torn between them, I’m also the proud owner of a P3C, so I had to look at the Soloist Carbon, but my cycling team has a deal with Pinarello.
Obviously, I will use either one for mainly bike races, not TT’s or triathlons.
Any input will be greatly appreciated.
BG.
a friend just got the Dogma FP and, without a doubt, it is the most beautifully constructed bike I have ever seen. Hard to go wrong with a Pinarello
Italian style versus a supter-techno approach… it’s tough to say.
It’s worth noting that the 4:13 isn’t Pinarello’s top race bike, while the SC probably is (assuming the race isn’t a hill climb)… You’re probably faster on the SC, if it fits. Why not ride the Dogma and see how you like it? Or are you set on carbon?
I know the dogma is Magnesium or some other ubobtanium material, I just got rid of an Orbea Starship carbon (main frame aluminum, carbon rear), and although, it was a great racing bike, I think I’m ready to stay with all carbon. I also have a Giant TCR, and a Look kg486, so as you can see, I like the feel of carbon.
Have you ridden them both?
I’ve never been able to pick a bike without riding it - word has it that the SC rides like a smoothed-out Soloist. That would be hard to beat in my book, plus it’s tough to knock the aerodynamics. Just looking at it, it begs to be raced.
I’ve ridden the aluminum Pinarellos before, they feel great and they are great racing machines, some reviews of the 4:13, indicate that it is very stiff, and that begs to go fast, so I think it would make a good racing bike, but the looks and aerodynamics of the Soloist, keeps me looking at it. Just curious, but you mentioned “as long as it’s not a hill climb”, did you mean to say that the Soloist will not climb as well as the Pinarello?, just wondering. Also, if I wanted to ride both before making up my mind, it’s hard to find a shop that will have your size and models readily available for test rides., so it makes it harder to decide.
No, no… I’m sure it climbs better than the aluminum Soloist, which is to say - VERY well. I only mentioned that it would be the Cervelo to race in all but a hill climb, where you’d probably pick the R3 or the Bayonne, simply because they’re the lightest bikes Cervelo makes. Gerard once commented about aerodynamics trumping weight in all but the most extreme climbing situations. In any case you can build up a Soloist Carbon to 6.8 kilos without cutting any corners without too much trouble. The frame weighs in at 1050 grams, I think I remember reading somewhere. Definitely not too heavy to be a great climber.
Neither bike is going to be on the “riding a pillow” end of carbon, both are very worthy racing bikes, both are fast, both are light enough, both are stiffer than most riders will ever need. But I wouldn’t be able to pass up the aerodynamics and looks of the SC if I could afford it. And I love all things Italian, so that’s saying something.
Agreed, another issue that might solve my dilemma is availability, I know the Pinarello will be available in my size sooner than the Cervelo. I ride a 51c. size frame, and according to Cervelo, that size will not be available until january or so, and another thing is fitting better to either bike. The Pinarello has a little bit longer top tube than the Soloist, so we’ll see.
I guess I need to be patient and balance things out, but that darn Cervelo is nice isn’t it?
It definitely is beautiful.
From what Gerard said, the soloist carbon will fit just like the aluminum soloist and the R2.5. So if you can find one of those, you’ll know how the bike will fit. That might make the wait more bearable. Plus you’ve already got some very nice bikes to ride, so you wouldn’t exactly be deprived, would you?
I guess not, but thanks for all the help, we’ll see what happens.
man! tough call. about as tough as my mercedes vs bmw wagon choice! either way, it’s a sweet deal. 
get the pinarello paris carbon.
jerk