I got the Cervelo Newsletter the other day and saw that CSC went one and two in Philly. Nice work.
What I was most interested in hearing though was that one was on a carbon soloist and the other on the soloist team. Why would someone make the choice to ride the team, when they undoubtedly have access to the carbon? Stiffness for the sprint? Better paint? (definately team)
Perhaps Gerard will chime in?
I’m especially interested because my budget will only allow the team frameset.
“Why would someone make the choice to ride the team, when they undoubtedly have access to the carbon?”
I don’t know whether that guy in this particular case had access to a soloist, but you’d be wrong to assume that all members of a team have access to any bike they want. In fact, it is very common that riders do NOT have access to any bike they choose, as teams/bike manufacturers are sensitive to costs. For example, even on the Discovery Team, year in an year out, not even all the riders in the TdF have access to the latest and lightest bike used for the mountain stages or the TT.
That is kinda true. Re Disco / Trek, it isn’t so much cost as availability (there may not be time to produce enough frames for the whole team, or the molds may not be made for certain sizes) and the need for the team mechanics to look after 15 more bikes on top of the 40 or so they already have to look after.
In CSC’s case, I’m pretty sure that the whole team could ride the SLC if they so chose. The SLC SL may be more limited in distribution.
Actually, from what I understand (from Cervelo University), CSC has all of its 1st year riders on the Soloist team. Call it an initiation or a hazing or whatever you like (seems like a darn nice way to get hazed huh), but an up and coming rider for CSC is not given the choice. What does that say about the quality of the Soloist Team as a frameset? How bout in the world of carbon fiber superbikes, there is still one company making a tour quality frameset from good 'ol aluminum. Kinda makes that $2k +/- price tag seem cheap.