help with frame choice...

thekgb said:

My question is: is it better to go with the Cervelo soloist for the aero benefits despite it being aluminum and a bit more heavy, than to take less than desired "sporty" seven and but opt for less weight, and more response/comfort with the carb/ti combo? My instinct says stay with the cervelo b/c it's more suited to crits (i think?). Also, sorry to be over the top, but can the seven be converted somehow? i mean isn't it about just taking the measurements from the cervelo and reproducing them on the seven frame? how much would i really lose.

Easy: ride the one that feels best.

alienator said:

Easy: ride the one that feels best.

i know, i know....

the problem is it's just the frame/fork, so i'm trying to avoid the whole dissemble/reassemble/refit/tweek ride for a month, "OK it didn't feel better", dissemble/reassemble/refit/tweek etc...i'm trying to save a bit of money in avoiding buying spare parts to fit in some components that won't work with both.

i may just have to bite the bullet, but if someone can give me a convicing "theoretical" opinion either way, i'll avoid the hassle and take my time and make the seven into a commuter...

Well, from a theoretical point of view, there's really not much separating the bikes at all. Some will argue that the Cervelo's aero advantage trumps anything from the Seven, but the sad reality is that aero benefits from that frame are less, possibly much less, than the benefits from the best aero wheels, which means you're probably gaining somewhere on the order of 0.1 mph or so at 25mph from your frame. That's not much at all. From an objective point of view, Cervelo frames aren't cleaning up in races around the world, be those Pro Tour or local amateur races, so the aero benefits certainly aren't demonstrably significant compared to other factors.

The lighter weight of the Seven is also not a very significant benefit, even on a hilly course.

Stiffness is only a concern if you think that it matters or think stiff "feels" better. Honestly, there is zero data that says that increased stiffness in a frame improves performance in any way at all. It's even questionable what sort of differences in stiffness a person can actually detect accurately.

I think the single most important factor(s) are your position on the bike, your comfort in that position, your confidence in how the bike feels, and your comfort over an extended time on the bike.

Frankly, I think comfort would be the biggest performance discriminator. If you feel beat up or tired after a time on the bike, then your likely to not have as much go juice when the time comes to apply it. If nothing else, if you're tired, you may be at a psychological disadvantage when the big move comes. Psychology plays a huge part in things like this.

Maybe that's not much of an answer, but I'm not sure an answer can get much better given all the unknowns.

i mainly race crits...

Race crits on whichever frame you would miss the least after a frame trashing stackup. The freebie 7 would be my choice of sacrificial lamb for crit derbies.

alienator said:

Well, from a theoretical point of view, there's really not much separating the bikes at all. Some will argue that the Cervelo's aero advantage trumps anything from the Seven, but the sad reality is that aero benefits from that frame are less, possibly much less, than the benefits from the best aero wheels, which means you're probably gaining somewhere on the order of 0.1 mph or so at 25mph from your frame. That's not much at all. From an objective point of view, Cervelo frames aren't cleaning up in races around the world, be those Pro Tour or local amateur races, so the aero benefits certainly aren't demonstrably significant compared to other factors.

The lighter weight of the Seven is also not a very significant benefit, even on a hilly course.

Stiffness is only a concern if you think that it matters or think stiff "feels" better. Honestly, there is zero data that says that increased stiffness in a frame improves performance in any way at all. It's even questionable what sort of differences in stiffness a person can actually detect accurately.

I think the single most important factor(s) are your position on the bike, your comfort in that position, your confidence in how the bike feels, and your comfort over an extended time on the bike.

Frankly, I think comfort would be the biggest performance discriminator. If you feel beat up or tired after a time on the bike, then your likely to not have as much go juice when the time comes to apply it. If nothing else, if you're tired, you may be at a psychological disadvantage when the big move comes. Psychology plays a huge part in things like this.

Maybe that's not much of an answer, but I'm not sure an answer can get much better given all the unknowns.

+1. There is no better answer than that.

Pull up the geometry from cervelo and from Seven and see how they match up. There may not be a real big difference. Seat tube angle, head tube angle etc can make one bike or the other "feel" faster or slower based on how you sit on the bike. My switch from a Lemond Buenos Aires to my current Soloist was a big change in feel. The soloist seems to handle better and "feels" more responsive, but that could just be feel.

I tend to agree with Alienator on this. If the bike fits and it's comfortable you'll figure out how to make it go fast, as long as it isn't so soft that the inner chainring rubs the stay. Or something like that.

All other things being equal, I go for fit. If it requires me to flip the stem, use a stem shorter than 11 or longer than 13, use a huge stack of spacers, or max out the seat post, it doesn't fit.