People have been riding randonnees up to and over 1200km on CF bikes for years with weights on board exceeding that of nun's. I have heard of very few problems with frames. A huge number of these "delicate" CF frames are shipped around the world to participate in these events... I've read of damage on steel and aluminium frames, but not on CF frames.

My own CF bike has done lots of miles and has various dings, which are only on the outer epoxy and not through to the CF. I've run handlebar bags on CF bars, and a modular Topeak bag and rack off the back of my CF bike. I might not tour with CF bars or seatpost or wheels (although the tandem has CF bars and we've done multiple centuries on it with handlebar bag in place), but the frame would be the least of my worries.

Personally, I think the naysayers' doubts are overstated (they do become monotonous and few, if an,y have posted examples to back their claims of CF fragility). Most forget that MTBs in CF get a tough workout, and then there are the cyclocross bikes. And if CF was that weak, we'd be hearing about broken forks every week.

I think aluminium went through the same "asplosion" hypotheticals back in the day.

I am no lightweight, and I've owned steel, aluminium, and CF, and so far one of the steelies is the only one to have broken (right rear dropout snapped in half after the bike was blown over in a gust).

Wheels and tyres are a different issue, but that applies to all bikes, CF or not. Machka and I have toured on 23C tyres for quite a while, and we don't over-inflate them, so we have a reasonably comfortable ride on typical sealed surfaces.

Comfort also is something that can be translated between bikes. There is no reason why the Cervelo should not be as comfortable as the Rivs if the dimensions between nun's contact points are similar or identical. And the seat is comfortable.

I hope you enjoy your touring on the Cervelo, nun.