Any owners out there want to share good or bad experiences with the QR Santo or Kestrel Talon. Is either bike going to deliver a softer or stiffer ride? Does one climb or handle any better with the Kestrel in the aero postion and the forward seat post?
Any owners out there want to share good or bad experiences with the QR Santo or Kestrel Talon. Is either bike going to deliver a softer or stiffer ride? Does one climb or handle any better with the Kestrel in the aero postion and the forward seat post?
I am not familiar with the QR. I’m a ‘Clyde’ who chose the KT for the tensile strength carbon maintains (??) for Clydes. Business Week magazine (7/04) chose Kestrel as one of its ‘Innovations of the Year’ for 2004. That honor pretty much sealed the deal for me. I called the company, had long discussions; I spoke with a lot of aerospace engineers in my office to figure ways a bike could haul my fat ass around.
Everyone convinced me Kestrel would be the answer to my questions.
I’ve had no problems with my KTSL (2003 model 35/50) with ~ 7k miles. If my ride can haul my 225# up Torrey Pines without exploding–that’s the ride for me. I upgraded the fork (to EC90), have 4 sets of wheels, different BB, stem (Deda Black Stick) and it’s maintained almost as well as my cars. Everything else? Icing on the cake.
Today’s carbon is probably better with the technology-base widening (China) with say, the monocoque design (e.g., Giant). If Kestrel comes out with a competitive design, I may petition the ‘Chief of Finance’ for an advance on my allowance.
Of course, I probably paid a ‘premium’ for my bike (looking at bikes these evening, I saw a couple Kestrels at ‘sale price’ which discouraged me a bit). All in all, it was a great investment at the time. Today? I would purchase just the frame, then piece it together myself with a lot of materiel from my current steed. I went first class; never skimped on anything.
Then again, I’m still a MOP-BOP with no real hope of podium stardom in this lifetime.
- kd