Road Bike, Cycling Forums banner
1 - 20 of 64 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
45 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hi all,
I'm in the market for a new bike and was looking for some feedback comparing these 2 frames. One is the Cervelo R3 and the other is a
Look 585. Both are carbon but I've been told that the Cervelo is a better frame, which I find hard to believe. I know it is lighter but Look have a great finish and overall quality to their bikes and a re also pretty light.
BTW I currently own a Look KX and am looking for a lighter bike with climbing in mind.

Thanks!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,469 Posts
test test test

holdenJames said:
Hi all,
I'm in the market for a new bike and was looking for some feedback comparing these 2 frames. One is the Cervelo R3 and the other is a
Look 585. Both are carbon but I've been told that the Cervelo is a better frame, which I find hard to believe. I know it is lighter but Look have a great finish and overall quality to their bikes and a re also pretty light.
BTW I currently own a Look KX and am looking for a lighter bike with climbing in mind.

Thanks!
have a read in Look forum and Other Frame forum for some opinions. Also see owner reviews here. Both are good/great, depends what fits your body best. I think Look may be more comfortable for distance work and Cervelo more suited to T/T type of rides but either one would be great IMO.

Enjoy and stay upright
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
518 Posts
Ivan Basso, winner of the Giro 2006 by 9' rode the Soloist on the flats / rolling courses and the R3 on the big mountains, plus Fabian Cancellara won the tough, rough course of the Paris-Roubaux on the R3 also.
That alone should tell you A LOT about the R3. I'd go for the R3. From what I've heard the only problem Cervelo is the lead time when you order: 3-4 months, or more.
Corsaire
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
476 Posts
Really?

Corsaire said:
Ivan Basso, winner of the Giro 2006 by 9' rode the Soloist on the flats / rolling courses and the R3 on the big mountains, plus Fabian Cancellara won the tough, rough course of the Paris-Roubaux on the R3 also.
That alone should tell you A LOT about the R3. I'd go for the R3. From what I've heard the only problem Cervelo is the lead time when you order: 3-4 months, or more.
Corsaire

I do not think that who won what on which tells you anything about a bike
Never have

A great rider that is on his game that day can win on any super high end bike
and probably on any high production bike

what you learn is what company is willing to spend on their marketing budget to sign who
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
518 Posts
Lance A. could perhaps drop me on his son's tricycle, we all know that, ultimately is about the "machine": you, the rider.
But we were talking about BICYCLES, weren't we? or your dilemma between those two fine carbon bikes, correct?
All I wanted to say is the R3 is a proven racing machine for both hills and flats, also tough for hard road conditions as having withstood the rough course (cobble-stones) on the Paris Roubaix of this year. R3 = lightness, toughness and versatility, as a bike. Besides I took it for a ride the other day, awesome feel. On the Look, can't say much since haven't heard much about it.
But from your post you seem to have your heart set already on the Look. Test ride both and decide for whatever you like and /or geometry feels right for you.
Corsaire
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,161 Posts
some facts...

Racing results really don't mean a thing, IMO. The R3 has been in use for a very short time, so it's a bit premature to brag about durability. As for surviving P-R, most teams used stock frames with only a change of fork, usually to a steel steering tube model.

If you take a close look at both frames, one thing is obvious, the LOOK has a much better finish than the Cervelo. LOOK uses the traditonal cross weave carbon on the outer layer for better appearance. The graphics are extremely thin, and glass smooth. The R3 will have random fiber patterns on the outer layer. The decals on the R3 are crude compared to a LOOK. They are thick and raised, like C'dale's Six13. The R3 is undoubtedly functional, but lacks a bit in aesthetics. The R3 also has quicker geometry, with a shorter front-center and less steering trail.

I've only logged about 400 miles on my 585, so I can't report a great deal about it other than it is a lot stiffer than a 461 or 381 and of course, not as comfortable on rough surfaces. The 585 will cost about $300 more by the time you get a seatpost on it. Below is a link to some pics. Since then, the wheels have been replaced with Ksyrium ES wheels, the stem is one size shorter and saddle is now centered on the post. http://forums.roadbikereview.com/showthread.php?t=61116

I'll have two R3s in hand on Monday (a 54 and a 51). Haven't decided whether to build up the 51 or just sell both.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
45 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
Thanks for the info.
Nice 585 BTW. I was sold on the 585 until I talked to a guy from a shop. Now I'm thinking hard about the R3. I guess I'll have to see if I can try one out. I persionally like the Idea that the bike is actually made in France by Look rather than in Taiwan, but maybe thats rediculous.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,161 Posts
made in France...

The 585, particularly a special edition like mine, is probably made in France, but LOOK also has a factory in Tunisia. At the time of start-up, only lower level models were to be made there, but where a frame is made matters not. It's all about quality control and who's making sure that the frames are made to spec. Unfortunately, you can't tell by looking.

As for lead times, that depends on where you buy. Many online dealers have either model in stock, ready for delivery in a few days. Not all sizes of the R3 are available right now. Last time I checked, Excel Sports had no 51cm or 56cm frames.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
29 Posts
I agree with C-40 about the R3 versus 585 finish.
My shop has both on display and you can clearly see Look's superior finish.
The R3 looks like it was finished in my back yard. I hope the finish isn't indicative of the frames other constructions.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
45 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
I found a shop near me that has a 56 in the R3 that their going to build up so I can test ride it. I see what you mean about the finish but I keep hearing what a great bike the R3 is. Plus it is a little cheaper that the 585.
I called a couple of shops around me that have'nt seen a R3 all year so I probably got lucky.
 

·
All I wanted was a Pepsi!
Joined
·
5,354 Posts
I'll second (or third) what C-40 says. I've just built up a 585 from an R3 and have about 150 miles on it so far. Not enough to give you any good data, sorry.

The R3 I didn't like at all at first. It replaced an R2.5 that I LOVED and I resented having to switch frames. The 585 is more similar to the 2.5 in ride quality and I like it's more traditional construction vs. the industrial look of the Cervelo. The R3 is certainly the stiffer of the two, but at 135 lbs the Look is just fine and anyway, I'd have a hard time flexing a wet spaghetti noodle.

Let me know if the 56 cm R3 works for you. Mine is a 56 as well, less than 600 miles on it, and will be considerably less than your LBS.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
61 Posts
Corsaire said:
Ivan Basso, winner of the Giro 2006 by 9' rode the Soloist on the flats / rolling courses and the R3 on the big mountains, plus Fabian Cancellara won the tough, rough course of the Paris-Roubaux on the R3 also.
That alone should tell you A LOT about the R3. I'd go for the R3. From what I've heard the only problem Cervelo is the lead time when you order: 3-4 months, or more.
Corsaire
Actually, Basso rode the Soloist only during the Giro.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
45 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
Lemonlime,
I think I saw your post and photos of your bikes, black 585 very nice. Is the R3 your selling built up?
BTW I'm still on the fence about which bike to get, do you like the 585 better?
The shop I talked to which also sells look frames said the R3 was a better frame for 200 less. I'm not sure thats true because I've been riding a look for 4 years which
I love, it's just a little to heavy for all the climbing I've been doing.
 

·
All I wanted was a Pepsi!
Joined
·
5,354 Posts
I have the titanium weave 585 here: http://forums.roadbikereview.com/showthread.php?t=62524

The R3 is frame/fork and seatpost only.

I don't know that the R3 is a better frame. I think at that level, it really comes down to personal preference and aesthetics. The Cervelo just never really "spoke" to me the way the Look does. I wish I could be more specific. I will say that the fit and finish of the Look is a little better. I wouldn't worry about weight, I believe the difference with frame and fork is like 50 grams or something ridiculously small.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,746 Posts
Just to vouch for Lemonlime on the R3....

I was going to put the frameset up for sale on eBay on Monday for him, but if someone wants to make an offer on it, please PM one of us by early Monday morning.

It is in like new condition and can be had for many hundreds less than a new frameset and includes the FSA seat post. I have been riding with him since he had the R2.5 and his only complaint about the R3 was it being too stiff. On the other hand, I have a Look KG271 that isn't stiff enough that I will probably end up selling. I finished building up an old CAD3 'dale that feels much better to me. Guess the stiffness preference is definitely rider specific.

good luck on your shopping and after chasing both these frames over the last few months, I can say you will look fast on either one :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
498 Posts
+1 on what C40 said.
I own a 585 & have owned 2 R2.5's Also owned a Look 386i in the past.
The fit & finish with the Look is miles ahead of the Cervelo.
Not to mention the nice little things like cable stand offs on the head tube & replaceable races in the headtube.
But more important to me is the Looks have never let me down. nor have I seen other have problems with them

The quality is apparent with Look & so is the reliablity. If you want a R3 give it a year at least & see if their track record warrants buying one.
I wish I did the same as some advised me about the R2.5
I bought the latest build in Oct 05 & believed their claims that the breakage was all a thing of the past & only the early models etc. etc. etc Well 5 months & 2 frames later I gave up on them. Yeah a lifetime warranty is great you just have to pay the shipping each time back to them & wait for a frame. All fine & well but I got tired of descending at 50+ mph wondering if something goes wrong again will it kill me? Or take me out of the sport I love so much?

In my opinion they are making a cheap frame & selling it for more than its worth. The only reason folks flock to it is because of their association with CSC. Their quality control is poor at best & blind at worst.
Cervelo is a young company & perhaps some day they will be a old company with a great track record.
I dont think they are there yet with their carbon frames.

Just my opinions based on my ownership of both brands.
Good luck with your decision.

PS: if it is weight your worried about either bike can easily be built to a 12+ lb. bike.
How light do you need it?
Mine is 13.8 with everday parts normal cranks brakes etc. but tubulars & 14 lb with clinchers
 
1 - 20 of 64 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