Weight vs. Aerodynamics (Cervelo R3 vs. Solorist Carbon)

[sooray02]

Good day!

I have a good problem. I'm getting a new bike and I'm going to choose between super light bike vs. super aerodynamics. I've been wanting to get a Cervelo, so I'm going to stick with it.

R3: Shimano DA compoents. Zero Gravity Ti. Brakes. Look Keo Ti pedals. Zipp 202 Tubular. It comes out to be around 13 lbs.

Solorist Carbon:Shimano DA compoents. Zero Gravity Ti. Brakes. Look Keo Ti pedals. Zipp 404 clincher. It weighs less than 15 lbs.

I know that R3 is super stiff, light and strong compared to Solorist Carbon. On the other hand, Solorist is super aerodynamic. So, does 2lbs make that much difference?? How about aerodynamics? Do you think having a aerodynamic frame and wheels could save more power than having 2lbs lighter bike?

Any thoughts???

Soo-re

ps. money isn't a issue. i was involved in an accident and that is how i'm going to get my dream bike.

 

[531Aussie]

unless you're racing up mountains, I'd go for the Soloist -- aero always beats weight in most situations. It looks better, too.

Cervelo seem to suggest that both frames are equally as stiff, but I'd guess the Sololist would be stiffer with its massive bottom bracket and the much chunkier seat-stays.

when speed matters on flat ground, it's ALL about aerodynamics and rigidity.
Check out the weights of these track bikes.
http://www.cyclingnews.com/track/2006/apr06/wtc06/tech/?id=/tech/2006/features/track_worlds_bikes

Seven of the heavier bikes range from 17.5 pounds to 20.7 pounds (!!), and they don't have brakes, levers, derailleurs, cables, cassettes or bottle cages!!

 

[padawan]

I'd get the Soloist - hands down.

The Carbon Soloist is only a little heavier than the R3. The weight difference between the two set-ups are the 202 tubulars v.s. the 404 clinchers. A set of 202 tubulars is 1.4 pounds lighter than a set of 404 clinchers. If you put 202 tubulars on the Soloist, the weight difference would be 1/2 a pound. If money is no object, get the Carbon Soloist and put 404 tublulars on it. You'll be lighter and more aero than most people you're riding with.

From Cervelo's website:
"The combination of tire clearance, vertical compliance and light weight means that Team CSC will be the only team able to get bikes as low as 6.8kg for the classics even with the use of heavier wheels and tires. For most other races, it does not make sense for Team CSC to use the R3 because the bike would be too light. There is no point in riding with a superlight frame and some lead weights under the saddle, better to use those few extra grams of weight to make the frame aerodynamic, i.e. ride the Soloist Carbon. But for those of us who do not have to be concerned with UCI weight limits, the R3 allows for a bike that is not only extremely light, but also very safe due to its stiffness & strength and comfortable due to its vertical compliance."

Pad

 

[sooray02]

Thanks for your thoughts...

so I guess I should go with zipp 404 tubular. i've never used tubular though... wonder how its gonna work out. but we will see.

Thanks again.

 

[azdroptop]

Get the soloist and lose 2 pounds.

 

[bobbyOCR]

Get the soloist and lose 2 pounds.

Ha ha. Go for the soloist, especially if there aren't any seriously high mountains. The superb aerodynamics of the soloist will make it a much better all round bike, along with the 404s. Hope you enjoy riding it.

 

[hd reynolds]

Good day!

I have a good problem. I'm getting a new bike and I'm going to choose between super light bike vs. super aerodynamics. I've been wanting to get a Cervelo, so I'm going to stick with it.

R3: Shimano DA compoents. Zero Gravity Ti. Brakes. Look Keo Ti pedals. Zipp 202 Tubular. It comes out to be around 13 lbs.

Solorist Carbon:Shimano DA compoents. Zero Gravity Ti. Brakes. Look Keo Ti pedals. Zipp 404 clincher. It weighs less than 15 lbs.

I know that R3 is super stiff, light and strong compared to Solorist Carbon. On the other hand, Solorist is super aerodynamic. So, does 2lbs make that much difference?? How about aerodynamics? Do you think having a aerodynamic frame and wheels could save more power than having 2lbs lighter bike?

Any thoughts???

Soo-re

ps. money isn't a issue. i was involved in an accident and that is how i'm going to get my dream bike.

A kilo difference between 2 frames! Kit is essentially the same except for the Zipps. I am quite sure there's no more than 300grams difference between the 202s and 404s. This further validate my suspicion that a Soloist is a heavy frame, proly more than 1500grams (w/ fork).

I'd go for the R3.

 

[padawan]

I am quite sure there's no more than 300grams difference between the 202s and 404s. This further validate my suspicion that a Soloist is a heavy frame, proly more than 1500grams (w/ fork).

HD, while I think you have one of the best avatars on the forum , I do have to correct you on this one.

There is a big difference in weight between 404 clinchers and 202 tubulars. I checked the wheel-set weights for both on the zipp website because I was a little shocked at the difference too. 404 tubulars are closer in weight to the 202 tubulars but the clinchers add extra weight because of the aluminum outer edge that is added to the carbon rim.

Pad

 

[sooray02]

it seems like no one wants to defend R3. no one owns one? come on.. i'd like to hear it from their side also.

does anybody use R3 as a cross bike? it sounds like it would make it a good cross bike to me after reading articles after articles...

 

[padawan]

does anybody use R3 as a cross bike? it sounds like it would make it a good cross bike to me after reading articles after articles...

If you have money to burn or you're a professional cross athlete, then yes, the R3 would make a great cross bike! Why anyone other than that would ride a bike that costs that much through the mud is beyond me. Especially when you can pick up a decent cross bike for well under $2,000.

 

[RapDaddyo]

Thanks for your thoughts...

so I guess I should go with zipp 404 tubular. i've never used tubular though... wonder how its gonna work out. but we will see.

Thanks again.

I think I'd go with the 404 clinchers. You can run the Tufo tubular/clincher or any of the clinchers. If you're going to use them exclusively for racing, the tubulars would be alright, but the clinchers give you more tire options. There's also a 65mm Bontrager coming out that looks interesting. I'm planning to give those a try with a PT SL2.4 hub.

 

[sooray02]

If you have money to burn or you're a professional cross athlete, then yes, the R3 would make a great cross bike! Why anyone other than that would ride a bike that costs that much through the mud is beyond me. Especially when you can pick up a decent cross bike for well under $2,000.

valid points... i know csc used R3 at paris-roubaix. i was wondering if r3 was made out of part alu. or steel. i'd be scared to ride that thing if it was full carbon. i don't even own a mtb either... but i'd like to go muddin one of these days. anyways... i've been sitting on my ass for past 7 months due to a pure freak accident and i'm about to go insane. my doc said he would make a decision regarding my condition tomorrow...

oh yeah.. would you train with zipp 404 tubular? or would you only use it as a racing wheelset.

 

[rayhuang]

oh yeah.. would you train with zipp 404 tubular? or would you only use it as a racing wheelset.

I was faced with the same dillemma last week as I ordered a custom set of wheels form Young wheels. I am terrible at mounting tubies first off and not many bike shops can do it anymore, and if they could-do you really trust the workmanship when your going 45mph into a tight corner w/ oncoming traffic!!

Not to mention when you flat a tubie on the road, you can try the goop that seals leaks, and if that doesnt work-youve got to mount it on the side of the road.


Theres plenty of ultralight, super supple, super grippy clinchers out on the market right now that feel very close to a tubular.

Ray

 

[hd reynolds]

HD, while I think you have one of the best avatars on the forum , I do have to correct you on this one.

There is a big difference in weight between 404 clinchers and 202 tubulars. I checked the wheel-set weights for both on the zipp website because I was a little shocked at the difference too. 404 tubulars are closer in weight to the 202 tubulars but the clinchers add extra weight because of the aluminum outer edge that is added to the carbon rim.

Pad

Thanks for the avatar compliment.
Weight weenies list the 2005 Zipp 202s at 1148grams actual and the 2006 Zipp 404s at 1237grams. That’s a weight difference of less than 100grams between both tubular wheelsets. Investigating the 404 clinchers show a big weight penalty just like you said. At 1672grams a set that computes to a 524grams (1.15lbs) difference.

Still, that’s 1 pound for the wheels only and the other pound surely from the frame.


Besides, looks alone should giveaway the soloist as a heavyweight - airfoil shaped seattube, huge downtube, superstiff BB with lots of material....

 

[sooray02]

hey guys...

i went to competitivecyclist.com and found out that 54 cm solorist carbon weighs 1180g and r3 weighs 870g. i don't know how reliable they are but yeah...

have a good one!

 

[hd reynolds]

hey guys...

i went to competitivecyclist.com and found out that 54 cm solorist carbon weighs 1180g and r3 weighs 870g. i don't know how reliable they are but yeah...

have a good one!

Fork of, say, 350grams = 1.53kgs. for the soloist.

 

[dm69]

Here is my suggestion

Get the soloist, zipp 303's tubular, zero grav, keo pedals, slr saddle, wing pro hbars and os115 fsa stem. Here is the key get campy record, its lighter and it doesn't have the cables poking out of the hoods which is better for aero. The front of the bike is most importnat for aero so thats why you should get wing pro and record.

The bike I listed above is pretty much the best road bike you can buy. best components from h/bars to pedals aswell!

It will be bloody light and very very aero. Howvere it wont make you any faster . for that you need a powermeter. maybe srm cranks?

 

[bobbyOCR]

Here is my suggestion

Get the soloist, zipp 303's tubular, zero grav, keo pedals, slr saddle, wing pro hbars and os115 fsa stem. Here is the key get campy record, its lighter and it doesn't have the cables poking out of the hoods which is better for aero. The front of the bike is most importnat for aero so thats why you should get wing pro and record.

The bike I listed above is pretty much the best road bike you can buy. best components from h/bars to pedals aswell!

It will be bloody light and very very aero. Howvere it wont make you any faster . for that you need a powermeter. maybe srm cranks?

Yeah, it does sound like it will beuild up to be beautiful. The gear cables, though, are a very VERY small contributor to drag. If they were a major problem, Shimano would have switched the design. Lance, Ullrich and Basso must truly be the best, imagine if they switched to campy . Also, Dura Ace is cheaper.

 

[531Aussie]

Fork of, say, 350grams = 1.53kgs. for the soloist.

do you think that's heavy? Crikey

 

[hd reynolds]

do you think that's heavy? Crikey

Yeah thats heavy and that's with a lightweight 350gram fork.