Road Bike, Cycling Forums banner
1 - 20 of 23 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
42 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hi,

I'm down to two bikes, the Cannondale Six13 5 (or 3) and the Cervelo Soloist Team. It will be my first road bike (and my first bike since grade school).

Both bikes feel natural to me and I've tried both bikes twice. It's difficult to compare which is quicker (or feels quicker) but the Six13 was more comfortable. I like the look of the Six13 in black and the Soloist in silver and red.

I might do duathlons in the future. Initially, I'll just get used to riding a road bike (I'm totally new to the sport -- never used bike shoes, etc.) . I actually run, and I wanted a bike for cross-training. Now, I'm interested in the cycling in general (I raised my budget from $1200 to $2k).

Any advice input would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!
 

·
Cannot bench own weight
Joined
·
4,298 Posts
PigmyRacer said:
On some level that is a severe oversimplification.
Not really. Comfort should be the biggest priority.

I have several different bikes, from a Soloist Carbon to a Colnago Master Light, and I'm "just as fast" on any of them. You'd have to be an elite rider to be able to really benefit from some of these "supposed" enhancements.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
650 Posts
Einstruzende said:
Not really. Comfort should be the biggest priority.

I have several different bikes, from a Soloist Carbon to a Colnago Master Light, and I'm "just as fast" on any of them. You'd have to be an elite rider to be able to really benefit from some of these "supposed" enhancements.
No I agree that comfort is a priority. Thats why I think that saying there is no difference in comfort between a carbon/aluminum bike and an all aluminum bike is a slight oversimplification.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
42 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
PigmyRacer said:
No I agree that comfort is a priority. Thats why I think that saying there is no difference in comfort between a carbon/aluminum bike and an all aluminum bike is a slight oversimplification.
I thought the six13 seemed the most comfortable, but the last time I tried it was when I started testing bikes more than a month ago. I stopped and then tried the Soloist a couple of times last week, and along with the six13, it stood out among the bikes I tried. But I wanted to hear about other people's experience because I can never find both bikes in the same store (I'm in NYC).

I think I agree that comfort is probably more important for me though. So are the two bikes just as comfortable as the other and am I just thinking the six13 was mroe comfortable because I was in a better mood that day :p?

Thanks for all the responses guys...
 

·
Carbon Fiber = Explode!
Joined
·
3,955 Posts
topflightpro said:
I had a Six-13. It was pretty awesome.
"had" and "was" is the key words here. Just kidding :rolleyes:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
I currently ride an old Trek 2000SL with old Mavic Kysrium Elites, and a hodge-podge of Shimano components (105, Ultegra, DA). Like you, I'm still fairly new to the biking world - getting ready to do my 2nd triathlon (just a sprint). I log just under 200-miles a week on the bike, and have been dying to upgrade.

I demo'd the Cervelo Soloist Team for a week, and in back-to-back, side-by-side, same-course, same-time-of-day testing, I saw less than a 10-second difference per 7.0-mile loop between the Soloist Team and my Trek. I also didn't feel as though the Soloist was "worth" the extra $$; it just didn't blow me away as I had hoped it would.

I then demo'd the Cervelo R3, and holy cats - talk about an improvement. My usual lap times for the 7-mile loop were around 22 minutes (it's got a lot of climbing and one steep descent at the end). I took the R3 out for a spin, and obliterated my lap time by a full 2 minutes. I got back on the Trek went out again, and same results - 22:36 laptime on the Trek. I figured I was just "excited" by the new bike, so I rode the R3 for another 6 laps - almost every lap was in the 20:1x range. Even my 6th lap (8th lap total) was in the 20:2x range.

It climbed so well, and it rode so smooth over the rough stuff (chip seal section and what I like to call the "washboard" section)... But I really wanted to go with an aero profile frame, so I demo'd the Soloist Carbon. It rode more stiff than the R3, and was just about as fast - I think the Soloist Carbon may have been just a tad too stiff for me. My lap times were in the 20:4x range with the Soloist Carbon, still a massive improvement over the Trek.

I've not ridden the Cannondale, but I think my results echo what everyone else has said - find something you're comfortable on, and you'll be happy (and usually faster). I never would've believed that a bike could make such a difference, but I'm now a believer. That R3 rocks!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
42 Posts
Discussion Starter · #20 ·
mistercoffee - Thanks for reply. I wish the R3 was in by budget (didn't bother trying it). Inspiring story though. Initially, I'll be using the bike for cross-training in between runs (for a similarly aerobic work-out while my legs recover from pounding), but I'm hoping to do duathlons or even triathlons (if I get past the swimming part) eventually.
 
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top