…just really curious. Do you really notice very much difference in ride comfort between the aluminium and carbon frames?
I raced the SL for the first half of the season and then switched to the Carbon when it became available. I have found that the Carbon really makes a difference on the legs over long rides/races. I race on Zipp 999’s and train on Mavic open pro rims and ran the tyre pressure the same on both bikes. I found that even if I reduced the pressure in the tyres on the SL it still was not as comfortable as the carbon on the long rides.
Well, I’ve ridden both. I’ve raced the P3 (older, red/white version) and the newer P3SL version. I haven’t raced the P3C but have about 200+ miles on it in two different frame sizes.
For me the bigger difference was fit. The P3SL is right on for me dimension wise: top tube length, bottom bracket proximity, even the low head tube height. I have a 53 cm P3SL set up right now. I absolutely adore that bike. I just “Bjorned” the front end a little by lowering it and I am on my thrid attemt at trying an “S” bend bar- this time the Visiontech “R” bend.
I rode the P3C’s stock with a Visiontech cockpit.
I have to conceed that you don’t feel the bumbs as readily on the P3C. I even went so far as to switch wheels so the bike used the same tire and wheel combination. They had different forks (Easton EC90 Aero on the P3SL, the stock Wolf Aero on the P3C).
I just couldn’t get 100% dialed on the P3C myself- that is a personal thing and I am so fussy about my fit and position that working long and hard on it at some time in the future may yield better results. The 54 is just too much bicycle for me. It felt like the entire length of the bike was too long for me and consequently, somewhat cumbersome and too stable. It was a lot of bike to manage. The 51cm was a scrappy little thing. That is where I would be likely, but I never did work out where I actually belonged over the bottom bracket. I was chasing that a little.
I have a sense tha the P3C probably does “ride” better- i.e., hitting it hard on a bad road for a long period of time the P3C would make the road surface feel smoother- you would likely feel the bumps less and it would be a less jarring ride I think.
That said, it would take enough work for me to tweek in the P3C for my posture, fit and position that I am still on my P3SL. Also, I just paid for our wedding and I’m broke- so no new bikes for me until spring.
The P3C is the ultimate verso of the P3 evolution I think. It eclipses any other carbon, so-called “aero” bike out there in that it is the only that may have aerodynamic features and benefits that really benefit the rider to any appreciable degree.
It’s interesting to see the new Trek carbon TT bike today on this forum- very, very nice and well done. However, they just haven’t picked up on how the wheel cut-out for the rear wheel *really *works optimally. I wonder if some companies (other than Aegis and Orbea) are just too reluctant to build a bike that mimmicks the P3C in appearance and are therefore unwilling to do a truly aero rear wheel cut-out. you’d think they would learn from the P3C design. Same with Scott, Kuota, Isaac and the others.
There is probably a reason why the P3 remains the gold standard, and the others either copy it ortry to debunk it while they design around it…
Pretty good bike in my opinion.
Tom,
Interesting, I own a 54 P3C and have not yet felt completely dialed in on the bike. I have put on about 500 miles and 3 races on the bike
I felt great on the 55 P3SL but went for the carbon. (The SL probably fit me better of the two)
Just curious as to what your measurements are that put you in between the two sizes.
What size SL were you riding? Are you riding in the morning?
Like Tom and bigred, I’ve had both a P3SL and now a P3C. My setup on the 55cm SL was pristine and felt great. I only had one HIM on the bike and around 2000 miles before I was hit and bent the frame.
After a bout with my insurance company, along came my new 54cm P3C. I only had about 600 miles on it before I did IM-Moo but felt reasonably comfortable but not as good as the SL. I attribute this mostly to tinkering with the front end lowering it another 20mm or so. It feels good but I’m stretching my flexibility to it’s limits. Overall, I’d have to agree that the P3C does give a better quality ride but I can’t feel much of a difference on shorter rides. When I’m really putting in the miles, my body just seems to feel a little better when I dismount.
Of course, it just looks cool too but that’s a different story that’s been discussed to no end. All I need to do is work on the engine to unleash the bikes full potential. Then maybe I’d be getting a good night sleep before Kona rather than posting here. 
-Shep
Standard P3 then upgraded to P3C.
Is there a noticable difference - oh yes. I was comfortable on the P3, but the ride quality of the P3C is a step up. No road vibration, no jarring around the shoulders. Was it worth the wait very much so. Have I gone quicker this year than last year - very much so. Short distances are very much about power and I’ve taken 20 secs off my 10 TT time, but the real benefits are over distance, I’ve taken over 2 mins off my PB over 25 miles and I am well up with the bods who I target.
I had the P3 and now P3C.
I found the C ride slightly more harsh. The fork and frame are much stiffer and I think that transfers road vibration. Not in a really bad way but slightly more then the original.
The C is no faster then the original.
The fit for me is better on the 56C. Overall they are both amazing bikes. The C is a really special bike, well worth the money and then some.
I’ve raced 2 ironmans on my silver (2003?) P3, and recently raced Powerman Zofingen on my new P3C. P3C is far less harsh. You know how you tend to train on lot on the same roads? The ride quality between the 2 bikes over bumpy stretches where I know every crack and pebble is very pronounced.
If the C rides more harshly and is no faster than the original, then what are your criteria for which you deem it “a really special bike, well worth the money and then some?”
.
Tom,
How do you like the R-bends? I have been questioning making the move from a regular set of vision bars to an s-bend and was thinking about the r-bends? Can you post a photo?
Hi hooker_elite,
Well, I was talking about this at length with a buddy of mine who is using them also. We both agreed that they may be faster but are definately less comfortable.
I think you get more leverage, but that leverage costs energy and it is tough on your your shoulders and back. This is likely to be one of those things the muscles in my shoulders and back would have to get accustomed to.
Yeah, I am thinking of mounting them on my P3SL, but and a little concerned about the wrist angle required to ride these. Have you put any miles on these yet? No one in the area here has received them in stock yet, so I haven’t been able to see exactly how ‘high’ the extention is. I really like the feel of the Profile T2, but not the weight.
A couple things to remember:
-
The most important parameter for comfort is your position. A good position on a concrete frame will be more comfortable than a bad position on a carbon frame. As you can see from some of the posts here, people have taken the opportunity to tweak their position when they moved from one bike to the next. That of course means that you have to be careful to make sure that you are comparing equal level of adaptation to a position on both bikes, and even then it is obviously not as good a comparison as when you compare identical positions.
-
Stiffness of the P3 vs. P3C. The P3C is stiffer in torsion and in the bb, but in vertical compliance they are about the same. This however doesn’t mean much for comfort. Strangely enough comfort is something that is studied relatively little, but in a project at MIT with Cervelo frames (carbon, alu and steel) the focus has been more on the total shock energy rather than the compliance. This renders some pretty interesting results. I will see if we can get that study posted on our website. But aside from the total energy, the accelerations are of interest too, that is the next step in the study. Please note that the study was started several years ago so it won’t tell you P3 vs. P3C as the latter didn’t exist yet back then and the study was done with road bikes.
"If the C rides more harshly and is no faster than the original, then what are your criteria for which you deem it “a really special bike, well worth the money and then some?”
For me, I found the exact same thing. What, to me, is “really special” on the P3C is the handling and engineering…really fabulous.
If the C rides more harshly and is no faster than the original, then what are your criteria for which you deem it “a really special bike, well worth the money and then some?”
Not much in it but I do find it slightly more harsh. In context both bikes are very, very comfortable. The ali frame was really excellent at absorbing road vibration. The C is as well. The fork of the C in my view may mean that a bit more vibration comes through to the rider. The C is a amazingly comfortable bike. I am perfectly set up on the bike and ride it forward and low. It really suits me.
As far as being faster I am not really sold on the aero advantage of frames. So it’s hard for me to say the C is faster. What really makes the difference is how you are set up on the bike. If you ride this bike the way it was designed then it is the fastest bike out there. Quicker then the original I could not say.
It is an incredible bike. My observations are based on a bike that has morphed from excellence. In that context it is a special bike and could be sold for a lot more money.
Gerard if the 56 P3C fits me perfectly would the 56 Soloist Carbon be the right size? Some seem to suggest riding a smaller TT frame then road bike…how does Cervelo treat this. If one of your customers is a certain size in the P3C then are they that size in your road frames.
Thanks.