I have searched past threads and a lot of people are saying that the Felt B2 rides hard, it does not feel like a carbon frame but more like an aluminum one. Someone even compared to a P2C and said that there was a huge difference in confort from one to the other.
B2 owners stand up for your bike and give your feedback.
I am thinking on getting one but now I am discouraged.
I dunno how it rides but its a beautiful bike one of the local girls has one and i saw it a couple days ago. I could probably ride it but it would take a couple days before i could get on it.
Grant
I took out a few bikes, all in the 3k range and I’m going to pick up my B2 here in 2 hours. In my opinion the B2 does ride a bit more like aluminum but in a good way. That is to say the bike doesn’t have the normal head tube torsion of other carbon bikes, it holds fast when whipping it around up hill, as compared to the QR carbon frame which I thought felt really loose. I think that a lot of people that have been riding carbon would think it rides stiffer because as far as carbon goes it is… but if you hop off an aluminum frame and get on a B2 (like I did) the difference in night and day. The B2 has the road dampening you expect from a carbon frame and is rigid in the BB which is crucial.
Its my favorite frame because…
- I’m a 215 pound guy and I need something that is going to hold up to hard cranking
- It looks really cool.
- It has very good options for positioning adjustment. I can set it up aggressively for speed in a sprint or something a little more relaxed for a long ride.
- Its the best “bang for the buck” in its price range.
- it looks really cool.
so I guess that some people will say that its stiff and rides like aluminum but I say its an improvement over old carbon frames, advancement in carbon fiber that gives you something close to the strength of aluminum but the ride and weight of carbon.
…but thats just my opinion.
+1 for your innuendo, awesome.
I’ve had my B2 for about a month now and love it. I was riding a Litespeed Blade and the biggest difference for me is climbing. It’s hard to imagine the B2 bottom bracket is any stiffer than my Litespeed but the B2 seems to have a better power transfer. And it’s crazy light. I know, I know: aerodynamics are more important than weight–but with this bike you get both.
Haha i wasn’t even thinking about how i said that till you mentioned it haha.
Grant
I don’t own one but had the opportunity to ride one that was set up for a guy a few inches taller than me. I was able to experience riding flats, up hills and a few turns. Yes, it is stiff, but not teeth chattering-like. It accelerates like no other bike I’ve ridden and climbs effortlessly. Also, unlike any other tri-specific bike, it cornered real well. I’ve passed my observations to others who are looking for a new bike and suggest they try one. They’ve all come back stating the B2 will be their next bike.
I also was able to ride a DA, set up for the same guy. It is a completely different feeling bike. It felt like it didn’t want to go in straight line - you had to concentrate much more to hold your line. It also didn’t feel as responsive accelerating. I didn’t have a hill climb or much of a cornering opportunity with it. The DA did have a disc and who knows what the tire pressures were, so that could account for much of the feel, but the straight line tracking was unnerving. As far as I know the big differences between the B2 and DA, besides the carbon weave used, is the fork. I wonder if the geometry of the two forks is different.
Anyway, yes, I want a B2, too.
Am I the only one that agrees with the article Dan wrote for Inside Triathlon this month? Check out page 38:
"Now more than ever, self-dilusion as far as comfort is concerned also applies to frame material. Modern bikes are built on a frame known as a double-diamond-the front and rear sections are shaped like diamonds to defy vertical compliance. Double-diamond frames don’t give-and they’re not supposed to, regardless of whether carbon or aluminum, and there is very little difference in comfort due to frame material.
Despite this fact, most people think carbon makes a more comfortable ride. While carbon has its advantages, most triathletes wouldn’t be able to detect a comfort difference on a carbon bike compared to an aliminum frame."
While I almost always agree with Slowman on fit questions and most other stuff as well, I think this is just plain wrong.
I bought a Quintana Roo Tequilo Aluminum ride as my first “modern” tri bike. Fit was very good, but I hated the ride of the bike. Before that I owned a steel Nishiki Beta.
I took that parts kit and put it on an Aegis Trident. Had to create a very different fit (long seatpost, long stem), but the position was basically the same. 100% better. All day riding in and out of the saddle became not only tolerable, but enjoyable. Same seatpost, seat, wheels, handelbars, etc.
Bought a couple of NOS Principia aluminum tri frames off of ebay because people said they were the best riding aluminum bikes around. Put together a new build kit for this bike. It was really light and climbed very well, which was the intention when I built it. I was trying to make a complete package for hilly tri courses. First few rides were fine. Anything over 40 miles was torture. I was pissed.
Took the build kit from the Principia and built a Kestrel KM-40 Airfoil. Now THAT is a bike for comfort. Kestrel knew what they were doing when they created this machine, and it was not only focused aerodynamics. It’s fast, stable, and most importantly, all-day comfortable.
Maybe my back is more sensitive than some others, or something of that nature, I really don’t know. I do know that every aluminum bike I have tried so far has been terrible.
That is my $0.02.
Chris
But did each frame have the same geometry?
I think the point of his article was to state that two identical bikes, other than frame material, will “feel” pretty much the same.
While I don’t doubt one of your bikes is more comfortable than the other, it may have more to do with the fit than the material. Or maybe not.
Seat angles were 76 or 78 on all of the bikes. I used forward seatposts (bontrager carbon, bontrager aluminum, and profile carbon) to create the proper angles. Some used adjustable stems to achieve the proper drop, etc.
Basically the fit coords were all the same. Like I said, the QR fit more easily (less adjustable parts) than any other frame that I dealt with, but it was still very uncomfortable.
Of course, I am not dealing with knock-off, run-of-the-mill carbon frames. Both of mine are built by companies with 20 years experience in carbon manufacturing and with a lot of attention put into the layup.
Chris
you know you’re in trouble when you admire the bike instead of the girl.
He asked about the bike so why would i talk about the girl?
Grant
Well, I’ve now done a sprint and a HIM on my B2 and even though I only have around 700 miles riding time for the whole year, (and only about 100 of that on the B2) I was able to do Eagleman with a 23.4 average only coming out of the aero position a few times to stretch when I came up on some of the small packs and didn’t get a chance to fly by them right away.
For me it is very comfortable, especially compared to the Specialized Transition I had. That was a solid bike, but I was more tired at the end of the ride with it than I was with the Felt. I really had no issues hammering for 2:24 in and out of the wind with the Felt.
Of course fit and position make all the difference in the world. But I can tell you this, the Felt is fast as shit, much faster than anything else I’ve owned or ridden and it fits me perfectly (and that includes an awful lot of bikes). I’d highly recommend it!
My recomendation depends on what age group you compete in.
Here’s my review if you compete in the M50-54 AG.
The bike sucks. I would compare it to a schwinn varsity. You would not want to be seen dead on one of these POS’s. If I were you, I’d wouldn’t buy it.
Here’s my review if you’re in any other age group besides the M50-54
I own a 52 B2 and would not hesitate to recomend it.
I’ve had it since the beginning of April and have ridden it 3 - 4 times a week.
It’s fast. It looks cool. It rides solid, not bone jarring, but solid. It accelerates smoothly. And did I mention, it’s fast.
There’s zero shimmy above 40 mph.
I don’t know what else I could tell you. I don’t think you’ll be sorry.
just a quick little sidebar here. Half the time the ride of the bike is determined more from the wheels, tire pressure, tires, base bar, saddle than anything else… The older style aluminum round base bars seem to make everything feel a bit harsher and a high tension lower spoke count wheel often stiffens way up as well. It’s tricky to compare how different frames ride… It seems compliant enough for M. Jones though so it can’t be that bad:)
I ride a Cervelo P3sl btw, old school aluminum and a carbon Felt F3C road bike. Easton Vistas to Rolf Vigors on the Felt felt like a whole new bike, aluminum handlebars to carbon on the Felt again gave it a whole new feel…
Hey,
I rode a B2 about a month ago and loved it. I then rode a new Bianchi D2 Crono and stepped right on to the B2. I could definitiely feel a differnece in the vibration coming through. The crono was more bass like while the B2 was tinny, a higher frequency. I liked the Crono but it took too much tweaking to make it work.
I am now going to ride a P2c, park it and immediately climb on the B2. Anyone able to compare these two bikes for me?
Brian
I picked up my B2 in early March and I’m extremely happy so far. When it came time for me to buy (after a lot of on-line “research”), I took my race wheels (Zipp 606’s) and saddle (Arione Tri) to my nearest tri shop (2.5 hours from home). Well, they weren’t exactly happy to hear that I wanted to test ride each candidate bike using my own wheels and saddle. This was a big purchase for me, and I wanted to zero out the saddle, wheel and tire pressure variables. They grudgingly obliged when I made it clear that I intended to buy a rather expensive bike that very day.
The B2 was already on the top of my list because . . . well, just because it’s so sexy and new. I took it out for a 10 mile test ride and loved it from the beginning. But, being the open-minded sort, I then took the new QR Seduza for the same spin. I liked the Seduza, but the B2 was the clear winner in terms of ride quality, IMO. While both seemed very stiff in the bottom bracket area (important for me at 6’1" and 185 lbs), the B2 did a much better job of smoothing out bumps and vibrations over an identical test course. Compared to my aluminum road bike (Giant TCR2), the B2 is smooth as silk. I’d planned to test a P2C in the same manner, but after a second spin on the B2 I was too smitten to change my mind.
In my first race this year (a sprint), I laid down my best bike split ever in terms of average speed despite racing in the pouring rain and having loaned my Zipps to a friend. I’m also months away from my planned late summer fitness peak. I couldn’t be more excited about this season.
That’s my experience. Hope it’s helpful.
Thanx trihoo… I looked at the Lucero, but everyone I have spoke with shot it down when compared to the B2 or P2c.
Brian
Thanks for the info. I was in doubt between the same 3 bikes. Now I am just waiting for the review of the P2C from pedalincoastal. But anyway I am inclined to get the B2 before it.