Help me decide.

Easy...

 

I'm biased but I would go with the Scott. I couldn't afford the Pro so I bought the CR-1 Comp and later upgraded the wheelset. I like it because like you said it has a comfortable geometry while still feeling fast. It's also nice being the only Scott on most of my group rides.

 

Tally is 1-1 now.

 

Scott CR1...light...as stiff as Cervelo...comfortable ride and generally spec'd better than a similarly priced cervelo. Good luck...you can't go wrong with either.

 

Both are great bikes and will serve you well. I just finished testing the 2012 CR1 Pro. Put about 200 miles on it and I have done about the same with the R3. I found the CR1 to fit better for me and I think for the value it is a better bike.

Cheers!

 

Is the cr1 stiff enough? I am considering the SL version, but some reviews mentioned due to its design it is not as stiff as compared to r3.

Also any chance of fitting a 3d+ to the cr1? Curious here as I got a rotor 3d+ power meter.

 

The SL frame is significantly stiffer than the CR-1 Pro, Team, Elite, and Comp (they all share the same frame) The frame is listed as being 20% lighter and 40% stiffer (or something like that...I can't find the link right now)

 

Which one do you think you would regret not purchasing the most?

I've ridden both, and the R3 was the one that I felt more "at home" on. The CR1's geometry just didn't feel quite right to me ... but everyone is different.

Check BikeRadar's review of the CR1. My feelings were similar.

Both really good bikes though.

 

Do this: Flip a coin. Heads is the Cervelo and tails is the Scott. See where the coin lands and be honest with your first reaction. If it coms up heads and your excited, get the Cervelo. If it comes up heads and you are either neutral or a little bummed, get the Scott.

 

Heh. This is the same thing my wife said to get me to shut up.

 

Then there you go. Don't get caought up in "analysis paralysis". I have a buddy who has been shopping for a new bike for 2 YEARS!!!

I guess I would go with the Scott because of the better specs. Again, you can't go wrong with either.

 

I've got a bonus coming in about a month. As soon as that hits, I'm pulling the trigger.

 

My wife rode both and felt that the R3 was better -- she described it a "leaping" forward when she turned the crank while the CR1 made her think she was wasting some energy. She didn't feel any difference in handling or comfort. She felt that the CR1 was no better in power delivery than her existing bikes. That was her perception so she choose the R3 team. Her previous rides were an aluminum Trek 2300 and older steel Bianchi.

I also rode the CR1 versus a NOS 2010 RS. I liked them both, but choose the RS because of the warranty and the company focus. I would have been happy with either. My previous rides were an aluminum Trek and Titanium Litespeed.

 

Scott CR1 in my opinion

 

Maybe this comment comes too late at this point. I was deciding between the same two bikes last year (2011 models), and ended up with the CR1, which has been great, based on about 2500 miles of riding. For me it came down to two factors: (i) the CR1 just felt at little better for me, I was more connected to the bike somehow, and (ii) specs were better for slightly less money. I agree with comments that either is a good bike and you can't make a "wrong" decision.

 

I just went through all my testing and the R3 won. Of course, its just me but if you are still looking... you can get the R3 for about 600-800 less than MSRP. There are a lot of closeouts out there and you can get your LBS to match. That difference just gave me a new cycle computer... even though i dont know which one to get. Ha.