I have seen some discussion of this in other posts but still am not sure.
I am fairly new to road triathlons (I’ve done more off-road races) and am buying a tri bike. I went
to my LBS planning on getting a Cervelo P1/P2 SL but they were much more in favor of getting an
all carbon bike and recommended the 08 Kuota K-factor. I had told them I was going to buy for
less than $2000.
I know that the Cervelo outperforms the Kuota in wind tunnels but the shop felt that the ride of
carbon beat all other arguments. It seems a lot of people here don’t agree. Now I am confused
because all of the talk of “head to your bike shop.” has contradicted what I thought I knew.
My specs:
6’1", 175 lbs
New York, planning on focusing more on sprint/Olympic distance for now then going up to HIM.
There are a lot of cliched bike-buying phrases, namely “whichever fits you better”. Unfortunately, here is another one: Aero equipment and windtunnel doesn’t mean s*** if you can’t ride it. Comfort is the single most important factor in riding a bike. It doesn’t matter if you can put out 400w in a position or if it breaks a wind tunnel drag record if you can’t HOLD THAT POSITION.
So what your LBS is trying to say is that the K-Factor (which is a nice bike!) would probably be more comfortable, and that might outweigh the benfits of the slightly faster tubing on the P1. Unfortunately, I’ve never ridden the P1 to compare its ride qualities. Remember that the K-Factor is going to be kind of harsh for a carbon bike, both because it’s a tri bike and because it’s fully monocoque.
I think you will be better off on a good aluminum bike, rather than getting a ‘carbon for the sake of carbon’ bike. What I mean by that is that a lot of the low end carbon bikes have poor production quality, and further they lack many of the benefits that a well put together carbon bike will have (namely good ride quality, stiffness, and light weight). I have put many people on both P1 (formerly P2SL) and S1 (formerly SLT) Cervelo bicycles who are amazed at how well they ride having heard so many times about the harshness of aluminum. As well, many of the aluminum bicycles will have better component packages than the similarly priced carbon offerings, again yielding a better overall bicycle.
That’s my opinion anyway, have fun choosing a bike!
Carbon does a better job of soaking up vibrations from rough pavement, aluminum transmits more road shock. That being said, every bike these days has a carbon fork, which helps damp the shock from the front wheel. The differences are fairly minor compared to items like saddle selection, and the P2 is a more aero frame than the Kuota. Riding a spoked wheel might be more comfortable than a disc…but I’ll race the disc for speed.
A bike that feels great for an Oly might really suck at mile 80 in Kona, but for 70.3 max, comfort is not an overriding issue. Lastly, take both for test rides and see if you can feel a significant enough difference. Both the P2 and Kuota are good bikes, so just make sure you’re happy with your choice (and not just buying what the shop needs to move out of inventory…not that sales people ever do that).
-The K-Factor and Cervelo are two different bikes and will fit a bit differently. The head tube is taller on the Kuota while the Cervelo has a steeper seat tube angle.
-While the P1 is a fine bike, the K-Factor is hardly a low end carbon frame. It’s as durable and comfortable as any other carbon frameset and you won’t regret owning it if you go that route.
I think you should get a fit and discover the optimal balance of speed and comfort for you. You can then make the best choice.