Advertise on Bikeforums.net



User Tag List

Results 1 to 21 of 21
  1. #1
    Senior Member?
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Denver
    My Bikes
    orbea onix, Cervelo SLC, Specialzed Allez, Cervelo P3 Alu
    Posts
    1,975
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    TT Bikes: Felt vs. Cervelo

    Mainly the lower end:

    S22 vs. P2SL/P1

    B-16 vs. P2C

    I can't try the felt before buying, so I'll compare geometry charts w/ the actual fit of the Cervelo.
    I can get a slightly better deal on the Felt than the Cervelo.

    Weight doesn't really matter to me, aerodynamics/price do.

    This is mainly for shorter TT's, It'll be my first and probably only TT bike.

    Thanks for any thoughts.

    B.

  2. #2
    Village Idiot
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Bahstaaaaan
    Posts
    19,911
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Are there any wind tunnel tests for the Felt?

    My point is simply that you know what you're getting with the cervelo unless data exists on the felt.

    Just my $.02
    Truth, like light, blinds. Falsehood, on the contrary, is a beautiful twilight that enhances every object.
    -Albert Camus

    Hammer Nutrition 15% discount!!!

  3. #3
    Lets Ride Trekke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Biking Country, USA
    My Bikes
    Trek 1200, Lemond Sarthe, Gary Fisher Tass
    Posts
    1,102
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by brianappleby View Post



    .... my first and probably only TT bike.



    B.
    I would get the Cervelo. You wont be looking back wishing you had for just a few dollars...
    Phil

  4. #4
    Resident Alien Racer Ex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Let me check.
    My Bikes
    Of course.
    Posts
    11,195
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Brain,

    Look at the P3 aluminum. Very good tunnel numbers, and if you're doing shorter TT's the better ride quality of the carbon bikes won't be worth the trade off in aero effeciency. P3's near the top at zero yaw, and a lot of the frames that are close fall away when you move the yaw from zero.

  5. #5
    Dude wheres my guads? skinnyone's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Guess
    My Bikes
    Not enough
    Posts
    2,680
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    They both support arguably some of the best TT pros. I'd go with the one that fits your budget.

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Orlando, Florida
    My Bikes
    2008 Trek 2.3
    Posts
    120
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I use to have a Felt tt, the s22. i loved it. felt makes a good bike!

  7. #7
    Banana Pancakes furiousferret's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Redlands, CA
    Posts
    2,458
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Get the Felt, if you get a Cervelo it will get lost with the hundreds of other Cervelo's at TT events.

  8. #8
    Senior Member?
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Denver
    My Bikes
    orbea onix, Cervelo SLC, Specialzed Allez, Cervelo P3 Alu
    Posts
    1,975
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originality doesn't mean much to me. Speed does.

    I've been looking at aluminum P3's, but people don't like to let those go for less than a carbon P2, and although it may be faster, used aluminum is a tough choice over new carbon.

    Thanks for the advice.

  9. #9
    Banana Pancakes furiousferret's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Redlands, CA
    Posts
    2,458
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Neither frame is going to make you any faster, if anything buy what has the better wheelset.

  10. #10
    Senior Member?
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Denver
    My Bikes
    orbea onix, Cervelo SLC, Specialzed Allez, Cervelo P3 Alu
    Posts
    1,975
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Already have a decent wheelset.

  11. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    2,140
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The difference between the two is pretty negligible once you put a rider on it. I'd get the Felt, it's probably cheaper.

  12. #12
    Senior Member tanhalt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    772
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by brianappleby View Post
    Mainly the lower end:

    S22 vs. P2SL/P1

    B-16 vs. P2C

    I can't try the felt before buying, so I'll compare geometry charts w/ the actual fit of the Cervelo.
    I can get a slightly better deal on the Felt than the Cervelo.

    Weight doesn't really matter to me, aerodynamics/price do.

    This is mainly for shorter TT's, It'll be my first and probably only TT bike.

    Thanks for any thoughts.

    B.
    If it's a choice of those 4 frames...P2C in a heartbeat. It's been shown to be only slightly slower than a P3C (if that) and all other things being equal (i.e. position, other equipment, etc.) it will be measurably faster than the other bikes you list above.

    Hands down the best "bang for the buck" (aerodynamically speaking) out there.

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    NorCal
    My Bikes
    Cervelo R3 (Force)
    Posts
    2,458
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    cervelo
    Cervelo Soloist Team (Rival)
    Cervelo R3 (Force)

  14. #14
    Race to train jrennie's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    suffering on the back
    Posts
    3,115
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by ridethecliche View Post
    Are there any wind tunnel tests for the Felt?

    My point is simply that you know what you're getting with the cervelo unless data exists on the felt.

    Just my $.02
    One would be foolish to think that felt/time/look/spec/giant/fuji/ridley/etc/etc don't all go to the tunnel and have test data on there frames. The question is if they do it before or after production, if they do it for ad photos or development. Wind tunnel test can be manipulated to show many different results and different frames/components to be faster than others. Cervelo likes to say they are flattered that in every published tunnel test the come in second to whomever paid for the test. I think there is some truth to that.

  15. #15
    BikeIndustryGuy
    Guest
    +1, wind tunnels are the most abused devices to sell bikes and parts. Unless they compare bikes with the same mockup rider dummy, in multiple runs, across multiple days, comparisons are rather pointless. No one does this. Cervelo uses a mock up dummy, but it's still data provided by a company selling the bike (which still amazes me that people swallow up in droves, especially in forums).

    It's very easy to skew tunnel data with the slightest position change from the rider. This is because in the total package, rider position has more of a real effect than any frame or wheels.
    At this level, you need to pick a frame that will give you the optimal position, if you can't figure that, go for the best price and with what you like.

  16. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Albuquerque, NM
    Posts
    2,939
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by BikeIndustryGuy View Post
    +1, wind tunnels are the most abused devices to sell bikes and parts. Unless they compare bikes with the same mockup rider dummy, in multiple runs, across multiple days, comparisons are rather pointless. No one does this. Cervelo uses a mock up dummy, but it's still data provided by a company selling the bike (which still amazes me that people swallow up in droves, especially in forums).
    Maybe because some of us are experienced at examining data with a critical eye and can differentiate between what is meaningful and what is not. For example given the lack of coupling between frame and rider, adding a rider only adds noise to the system and makes it harder to elucidate the difference between frames. As to repeating runs on different days, unless you believe the phase of the Moon or the gravitational pull of the Sun affects the results, I see no benefit to this.

  17. #17
    Dude wheres my guads? skinnyone's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Guess
    My Bikes
    Not enough
    Posts
    2,680
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by asgelle View Post
    Maybe because some of us are experienced at examining data with a critical eye and can differentiate between what is meaningful and what is not. For example given the lack of coupling between frame and rider, adding a rider only adds noise to the system and makes it harder to elucidate the difference between frames. As to repeating runs on different days, unless you believe the phase of the Moon or the gravitational pull of the Sun affects the results, I see no benefit to this.
    True. Is the frame is a significant portion of total drag? Does anyone know? Curious.

    Intuitively it seems to me that it would be smaller component of total drag when compared to the rider ot the wheels.

  18. #18
    Race to train jrennie's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    suffering on the back
    Posts
    3,115
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Of course the frame is a smaller component of total drag than rider, as is the helmet, suit, wheels and everything else but drag is drag and if it can be reduced to net the rider the same time on say 45w less then it becomes a big component.

  19. #19
    Dude wheres my guads? skinnyone's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Guess
    My Bikes
    Not enough
    Posts
    2,680
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by jrennie View Post
    Of course the frame is a smaller component of total drag than rider, as is the helmet, suit, wheels and everything else but drag is drag and if it can be reduced to net the rider the same time on say 45w less then it becomes a big component.
    I guess my thinking is that we are talking small deltas between small numbers. Just the frame alone that is.

  20. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Albuquerque, NM
    Posts
    2,939
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by skinnyone View Post
    I guess my thinking is that we are talking small deltas between small numbers. Just the frame alone that is.
    John Cobb puts the difference between a good aero frame and a moderate one at about 1 minute for a 40 km TT when the rider produces 200-300 W. http://www.amazon.com/High-Performan...8269949&sr=8-1

  21. #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,918
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The P2c is one of the top aero frames (wind tunnel data) out there except for the P3/P4. If you can find one at a deal the P3 SL (alum) is just a tad less aero but way heavier than the P2c.

    I had the same issue trying to find a "cheap" P3 SL where the seller wanted 800-1000 for the frame. By the time I built it up the cost was only a few hundered less than a P2c. I went with the P2c
    Please remember that all statements unless quoted, are strictly my opinion of what happened. That there are as many opinions as there are spectators attending. I just choose to publish mine on this forum. And would NEVER intend to purposely hurt or discredit any other cyclist.... With that said... HTFU!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •