Road Bike, Cycling Forums banner
1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
42 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Im having trouble deciding between a cervelo soloist carbon or a cervelo R3 anyone have any imput for me? I just can't decide!! I think I'm leaning towards the R3 because its super light, but the soloist is aero. I just can't decide.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,358 Posts
What kind of riding do you do? If you don't do a lot of climbing, the soloist could be slightly faster. Me, I mostly care about climbing, so I went with the R3. It's also cheaper, and I liked the ride. Then there is the argument that you should buy a bike to help out your weaknesses rather than accentuating your strengths. Which would invert your preference.

And of course if you are not racing it doesn't make any actual difference. Try riding both and see what you like.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
42 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
R3

ericm979 said:
What kind of riding do you do? If you don't do a lot of climbing, the soloist could be slightly faster. Me, I mostly care about climbing, so I went with the R3. It's also cheaper, and I liked the ride. Then there is the argument that you should buy a bike to help out your weaknesses rather than accentuating your strengths. Which would invert your preference.

And of course if you are not racing it doesn't make any actual difference. Try riding both and see what you like.
I do live in the foothills of the Smoky Mountains so there is planty of climbing around that is why the R3 is even on my list. I'm thinking I will go with the R3 I have just yet to see one in person yet and I work for a bike shop thats a cervelo dealer. Tells you how popular the bike is.
 

·
All I wanted was a Pepsi!
Joined
·
5,354 Posts
My Story

While waiting for Cannondale to warranty a frame, I picked up an R2.5.

Two months later the down tube came unglued from the head tube and Cervelo gave me an R3 to replace. At first, I didn't like it...really, almost couldn't stand it. It was so much stiffer than the 2.5 (I'm 135 after eating & never felt any flex on the 2.5) and the aesthetics of the square tubing, etc. just didn't do it for me.

The R3 is scary light and with the tubing and flattish seatstays looks a little unorthodox. It climbs very well and is supremely stable at speeds approaching 50 mph. The ride to me feels much like my Cannondale CAAD8, as far as ride quality goes.

When the shop got in a Look 585 I fell instantly in love and ordered a frame (which I am waiting to build.) Not sure what to do with the Cervelo, as I've come to really like it over the past couple of months. So for now, the R3 is for sale (size 56) but it won't break my heart if I don't get a decent price for it.

I've test ridden a couple Soloists and never cared for them. I'm sorry I can't qualify that remark specifically. The couple that I rode always had the cabling rattling around the top tube. My Saturday group ride has three or four Soloists, including two carbon versions, and without fail they are noisy.

IMHO, YMMV, etc etc.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
38 Posts
Well like the above post, I also had a R2.5 and loved it, until the seat stay came unbonded about 15months in. They game me the option of the new R3 or a carbon soloist, now I weigh about 200lbs and the R3 and a super light frame just freaked me out. So I went with the Carbon Soloist, and this is by far and away the best bike I have ever owned. I hear people say the Soloist and R3 are stiff, now I have owned Aluminum bikes in the past and they are stiff, so this needs a little clarifying. The frame has NO Flex, and when you push it go's and there is no energy loss, which the R2.5 had. But the ride is just as comfortable as any Carbon bike and the R2.5. I guess I would let the ride feel be your guide, but I think you safe either way.

Cheers!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,358 Posts
My "56" R3 measures 53cm from the center of the BB to the top of the seat tube clamp.

I've seen two other R3s, in the San Francisco bay area where road cycling is very popular.

It is not a pretty frame. I happen to like the industrial look but I think the R2.5 looked better, especially with the blue logo. But I bought it to ride, not to look at. It is comfortable yet stiff. I can feel the frame flexing when I stand on the pedals to drive over a rise, but not at much as my other bikes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8 Posts
I just picked up my Carbon Soloist this past Friday. I was able to go on one good ride so far, and am very happy with the bike. The BB is very stiff, but the ride is still very comfortable. I am coming from a 6 year old Litespeed Classic, so I was expecting a stiffer ride, but I was still very impressed.

My advice is to test ride both. My shop, Wheelworks in Davis CA, had all of the bikes I was considering so I could compare R3 vs. Soloist Carbon. My opinion is that the Soloist had a noticeable aero advantage that I thought was a larger consideration over weight. Although we have plenty of hills here, I also wanted something fast for triathlons/duathlons. It all depends on what you want to use it for. For example, if centuries was my priority, I would have gotten a Look 585; that is the smoothest, most comfortable, but stiff bike I have ridden.

Good luck.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,611 Posts
R3 -- Feedback, please!

Can anyone confirm whether the R3 has a compact geometry in respect of the front wheel area? I met a guy at a bike shop yesterday (a racer) with his R3 -- he has had it two months and he loves the light weight, stiffness and comfort, yet he says that the cockpit area makes him crunch up more than normal (this was a 54 or 55 frame, I believe). He's now looking to sell it. I read the R3 review in the Bicyling 2006 Bike Review Annual and it had the same negative comment, that you feel like you're in a time trial position.

I am seriously considering the R3, but this negative comment has me a little cautious now. Anyone with a similar experience??
 
1 - 12 of 12 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