eBay: 2007 Cervelo R3 Dura-Ace 10-speed



Ted wrote:
> http://xrl.us/Cervelo
>

A rider was attacked a couple of weeks ago on the San Gabriel River bike
trail in north Long Beach, CA, and his Cervelo stolen.
 
On Nov 22, 12:01 pm, Ted
<[email protected]> wrote:
> http://xrl.us/Cervelo


"The Cervélo R3 SL is quite possibly the fastest bike that we have
ever tested"
- Cycling Plus

That alone would guarantee that I would NEVER buy a Cervelo as long as
I live. Anyone that would write such utter moronish trash couldn't
have a single idea what a bicycle is.
 
On Nov 26, 7:38 am, [email protected] wrote:
> On Nov 22, 12:01 pm, Ted
>
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >http://xrl.us/Cervelo

>
> "The Cervélo R3 SL is quite possibly the fastest bike that we have
> ever tested"
> - Cycling Plus
>
> That alone would guarantee that I would NEVER buy a Cervelo as long as
> I live. Anyone that would write such utter moronish trash couldn't
> have a single idea what a bicycle is.


No, but they understand hype and marketing dollars.
 
Scott wrote:
> On Nov 26, 7:38 am, [email protected] wrote:
>> On Nov 22, 12:01 pm, Ted
>>
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> http://xrl.us/Cervelo

>> "The Cervélo R3 SL is quite possibly the fastest bike that we have
>> ever tested"
>> - Cycling Plus
>>
>> That alone would guarantee that I would NEVER buy a Cervelo as long as
>> I live. Anyone that would write such utter moronish trash couldn't
>> have a single idea what a bicycle is.

>
> No, but they understand hype and marketing dollars.


What's the problem with the statement?

Okay, so the anticipated difference in speed between a Cervelo Soloist and a typical round-tubed bike is around 0.08 mph, by my calculations: it could never be detected by a test ride without a very careful trial involving controlled conditions and precise timing.

But it nevertheless may still be true, all other things (fit and wheels, for example) constant.

Dan
 
Dan Connelly wrote:
> But it nevertheless may still be true, all other things (fit and wheels, for example) constant.
>


I forgot tires, tire pressure, inner tubes or # of layers of glue, whether a jersey was zipped or not, whether hands are on the drops or hoods, neck angle, and number and position of water bottles, and whether helmet vents are covered.

Dan
 
On Nov 26, 10:58 am, Dan Connelly <d_j_c_o_n_n_e_l@y_a_h_o_o_._c_o_m>
wrote:
> Scott wrote:
> > On Nov 26, 7:38 am, [email protected] wrote:
> >> On Nov 22, 12:01 pm, Ted

>
> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>http://xrl.us/Cervelo
> >> "The Cervélo R3 SL is quite possibly the fastest bike that we have
> >> ever tested"
> >> - Cycling Plus

>
> >> That alone would guarantee that I would NEVER buy a Cervelo as long as
> >> I live. Anyone that would write such utter moronish trash couldn't
> >> have a single idea what a bicycle is.

>
> > No, but they understand hype and marketing dollars.

>
> What's the problem with the statement?
>
>
> Dan


Nothing's wrong with the statement. It is what it is. Cycling Plus
is a magazine dependent on their advertisers to survive. Of course
they write glowing things about bikes they review. D'uh.

Of course, Tom takes it as evidence he shouldn't buy a Cervelo, as if
it's Cervelo's fault. Maybe he should just take it as evidence that
you shouldn't take bike reviews in magazines at face value, which I'm
quite sure he already knows.
 
Dans le message de news:[email protected],
Dan Connelly <d_j_c_o_n_n_e_l@y_a_h_o_o_._c_o_m> a réfléchi, et puis a
déclaré :
> Dan Connelly wrote:
>> But it nevertheless may still be true, all other things (fit and
>> wheels, for example) constant.
>>

>
> I forgot tires, tire pressure, inner tubes or # of layers of glue,
> whether a jersey was zipped or not, whether hands are on the drops or
> hoods, neck angle, and number and position of water bottles, and
> whether helmet vents are covered.
>
> Dan


This isn't the dork forum. 0.08 miles in an hour, between equally matched
competitors gives you (let's see if I can grok the non-metric aspect) a
winning margin of 140 yards. The rot about drafting etc. is just that -
rot. Equally matched means able to use the same percentage of time
following or leading. And over that hour, it also means a reserve energy
greater than the lower equipped bike.
--
Bonne route !

Sandy
(not currently in) Verneuil-sur-Seine FR
 
On Nov 26, 6:51 pm, "Sandy" <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> This isn't the dork forum. 0.08 miles in an hour, between equally matched
> competitors gives you (let's see if I can grok the non-metric aspect) a
> winning margin of 140 yards. The rot about drafting etc. is just that -
> rot. Equally matched means able to use the same percentage of time
> following or leading. And over that hour, it also means a reserve energy
> greater than the lower equipped bike.
> --
> Bonne route !
>
> Sandy
> (not currently in) Verneuil-sur-Seine FR


Damn Sandy. Another reason I like you. I'd bet you actually know where
"grok" came from and what it means.
Bill C
 
"Scott" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:2bebe65d-8891-4e65-9499-798b31ddbca4@i29g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
>Nothing's wrong with the statement. It is what it is. Cycling Plus
>is a magazine dependent on their advertisers to survive. Of course
>they write glowing things about bikes they review. D'uh
>
>Of course, Tom takes it as evidence he shouldn't buy a Cervelo, as if
>it's Cervelo's fault. Maybe he should just take it as evidence that
>you shouldn't take bike reviews in magazines at face value, which I'm
>quite sure he already knows.


Could you imagine a Consumer Reports piece instead?
 
Sandy wrote:
> Dans le message de news:[email protected],
> Dan Connelly <d_j_c_o_n_n_e_l@y_a_h_o_o_._c_o_m> a réfléchi, et puis a
> déclaré :
>> Dan Connelly wrote:
>>> But it nevertheless may still be true, all other things (fit and
>>> wheels, for example) constant.
>>>

>> I forgot tires, tire pressure, inner tubes or # of layers of glue,
>> whether a jersey was zipped or not, whether hands are on the drops or
>> hoods, neck angle, and number and position of water bottles, and
>> whether helmet vents are covered.
>>
>> Dan

>
> This isn't the dork forum. 0.08 miles in an hour, between equally matched
> competitors gives you (let's see if I can grok the non-metric aspect) a
> winning margin of 140 yards. The rot about drafting etc. is just that -
> rot. Equally matched means able to use the same percentage of time
> following or leading. And over that hour, it also means a reserve energy
> greater than the lower equipped bike.


Good. You pass the test. Of course, all the other factors are going to be optimized relatively independent of the frame.

But an informal ride by a magazine tester isn't going to reveal anything. There's too many sources of variability.

Dan
 
On Nov 26, 4:18 pm, "Carl Sundquist" <[email protected]> wrote:

> >Nothing's wrong with the statement. It is what it is. Cycling Plus
> >is a magazine dependent on their advertisers to survive. Of course
> >they write glowing things about bikes they review. D'uh

>
> >Of course, Tom takes it as evidence he shouldn't buy a Cervelo, as if
> >it's Cervelo's fault. Maybe he should just take it as evidence that
> >you shouldn't take bike reviews in magazines at face value, which I'm
> >quite sure he already knows.

>
> Could you imagine a Consumer Reports piece instead?


Best review I've read this year was written by Bike Snob NYC:


The BSNYC 2008 Dream Bike Shootout

As a cyclist and writer, I've long dreamed of seeing my work printed
in the pages of "Bicycling" magazine. So far, my efforts towards
gaining entree into the "Redbook" of cycling publications have been
thwarted. My pitches that have been rejected so far include:

"How To Raise (Or Lower) Your Saddle "
"Seven Tips for Repairing a Flat Tire--Underwater!"
"Five Ways To Keep Your Beer Gut Off Your Top Tube"
"Primal Jerseys and Half Shorts: Not Just For Pros Anymore"
"Six Tips For Out-Sprinting Your Wife"

This time, though, I'm confident I will finally get in. An issue of
"Bicycling" without a bike shootout is like an issue of "Playboy"
without a centerfold, or like an issue of "The New Yorker" without an
unreadably boring short story. So I've taken it upon myself to review
three of the hottest 2008 road bikes out there. Read on--I'm sure
you'll agree my success is virtually assured:

<http://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.com/2007/08/bsnyc-2008-dream-bike-
shootout.html>


=====

Jim
 
On Nov 26, 5:04 pm, Dan Connelly <d_j_c_o_n_n_e_l@y_a_h_o_o_._c_o_m>
wrote:
> Sandy wrote:
> > Dans le message denews:[email protected],
> > Dan Connelly <d_j_c_o_n_n_e_l@y_a_h_o_o_._c_o_m> a réfléchi, et puisa
> > déclaré :
> >> Dan Connelly wrote:
> >>> But it nevertheless may still be true, all other things (fit and
> >>> wheels, for example) constant.

>
> >> I forgot tires, tire pressure, inner tubes or # of layers of glue,
> >> whether a jersey was zipped or not, whether hands are on the drops or
> >> hoods, neck angle, and number and position of water bottles, and
> >> whether helmet vents are covered.

>
> >> Dan

>
> > This isn't the dork forum. 0.08 miles in an hour, between equally matched
> > competitors gives you (let's see if I can grok the non-metric aspect) a
> > winning margin of 140 yards. The rot about drafting etc. is just that -
> > rot. Equally matched means able to use the same percentage of time
> > following or leading. And over that hour, it also means a reserve energy
> > greater than the lower equipped bike.

>
> Good. You pass the test. Of course, all the other factors are going to be optimized relatively independent of the frame.
>
> But an informal ride by a magazine tester isn't going to reveal anything. There's too many sources of variability.


That's why the real test is how fast you can tune out. I tuned out in
0.08 ns. Not the fastest fall time, but fast enough that I have time
to fund afternoon training rides, and that is something that really
matters.
 
"Sandy" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Dans le message de news:[email protected],
> Dan Connelly <d_j_c_o_n_n_e_l@y_a_h_o_o_._c_o_m> a réfléchi, et puis a
> déclaré :
>> Dan Connelly wrote:
>>> But it nevertheless may still be true, all other things (fit and
>>> wheels, for example) constant.
>>>

>>
>> I forgot tires, tire pressure, inner tubes or # of layers of glue,
>> whether a jersey was zipped or not, whether hands are on the drops or
>> hoods, neck angle, and number and position of water bottles, and
>> whether helmet vents are covered.
>>
>> Dan

>
> This isn't the dork forum. 0.08 miles in an hour, between equally matched
> competitors gives you (let's see if I can grok the non-metric aspect) a
> winning margin of 140 yards. The rot about drafting etc. is just that -
> rot. Equally matched means able to use the same percentage of time
> following or leading. And over that hour, it also means a reserve energy
> greater than the lower equipped bike.


There's absolutely NO way that there would be nearly 10% difference in bike
speed. If Dan thought about his numbers for a minute he'd have come to the
same conclusion.
 
"Scott" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:2bebe65d-8891-4e65-9499-798b31ddbca4@i29g2000prf.googlegroups.com...

Nothing's wrong with the statement. It is what it is. Cycling Plus
is a magazine dependent on their advertisers to survive. Of course
they write glowing things about bikes they review. D'uh.

Of course, Tom takes it as evidence he shouldn't buy a Cervelo, as if
it's Cervelo's fault. Maybe he should just take it as evidence that
you shouldn't take bike reviews in magazines at face value, which I'm
quite sure he already knows.

-----------------------------

Scott, do you really think that Cervelo had nothing whatsoever to do with
that claim?
 
Tom Kunich wrote:
> "Sandy" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> Dans le message de news:[email protected],
>> Dan Connelly <d_j_c_o_n_n_e_l@y_a_h_o_o_._c_o_m> a réfléchi, et puis a
>> déclaré :
>>> Dan Connelly wrote:
>>>> But it nevertheless may still be true, all other things (fit and
>>>> wheels, for example) constant.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I forgot tires, tire pressure, inner tubes or # of layers of glue,
>>> whether a jersey was zipped or not, whether hands are on the drops or
>>> hoods, neck angle, and number and position of water bottles, and
>>> whether helmet vents are covered.
>>>
>>> Dan

>>
>> This isn't the dork forum. 0.08 miles in an hour, between equally
>> matched competitors gives you (let's see if I can grok the non-metric
>> aspect) a winning margin of 140 yards. The rot about drafting etc. is
>> just that - rot. Equally matched means able to use the same
>> percentage of time following or leading. And over that hour, it also
>> means a reserve energy greater than the lower equipped bike.

>
> There's absolutely NO way that there would be nearly 10% difference in
> bike speed. If Dan thought about his numbers for a minute he'd have come
> to the same conclusion.


I wrote 0.08 mph, not 10%... I never implied anything else.

Dan

>
 
Dan Connelly wrote:
> I wrote 0.08 mph, not 10%... I never implied anything else.


Maybe Tom only rides at 0.8 mph.
 
Scott wrote:

> Of course, Tom takes it as evidence he shouldn't buy a Cervelo, as if
> it's Cervelo's fault. Maybe he should just take it as evidence that
> you shouldn't take bike reviews in magazines at face value, which I'm
> quite sure he already knows.


I take it as evidence that Tom's afraid of speed.
 
"Jim Feeley" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Nov 26, 4:18 pm, "Carl Sundquist" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > >Nothing's wrong with the statement. It is what it is. Cycling Plus
> > >is a magazine dependent on their advertisers to survive. Of course
> > >they write glowing things about bikes they review. D'uh

> >
> > >Of course, Tom takes it as evidence he shouldn't buy a Cervelo, as if
> > >it's Cervelo's fault. Maybe he should just take it as evidence that
> > >you shouldn't take bike reviews in magazines at face value, which I'm
> > >quite sure he already knows.

> >
> > Could you imagine a Consumer Reports piece instead?

>
> Best review I've read this year was written by Bike Snob NYC:
>
>
> The BSNYC 2008 Dream Bike Shootout
>
> As a cyclist and writer, I've long dreamed of seeing my work printed
> in the pages of "Bicycling" magazine. So far, my efforts towards
> gaining entree into the "Redbook" of cycling publications have been
> thwarted. My pitches that have been rejected so far include:
>
> "How To Raise (Or Lower) Your Saddle "
> "Seven Tips for Repairing a Flat Tire--Underwater!"
> "Five Ways To Keep Your Beer Gut Off Your Top Tube"
> "Primal Jerseys and Half Shorts: Not Just For Pros Anymore"
> "Six Tips For Out-Sprinting Your Wife"
>
> This time, though, I'm confident I will finally get in. An issue of
> "Bicycling" without a bike shootout is like an issue of "Playboy"
> without a centerfold, or like an issue of "The New Yorker" without an
> unreadably boring short story. So I've taken it upon myself to review
> three of the hottest 2008 road bikes out there. Read on--I'm sure
> you'll agree my success is virtually assured:
>
> <http://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.com/2007/08/bsnyc-2008-dream-bike-
> shootout.html>
>
>
> =====
>
> Jim


But after further review, the Cervelo, like me, is vertically stiff and
laterally compliant.