Redcorn,

Similar to the guys that have preceded me, I appreciate the efforts and opinions you have shared on the forum.

The insights regarding wheels and SRAM has been great.

 I am looking at upgrading my ride around year end.  I would be interested in your insights regarding your Cervelo frame.  I was considering an Orbea Orca (I currently ride an Orbea Dauphine).

 Cheers

Brad

Redcorn,

I thought this might be helpful for Q factors:  I was switching from 7700 Dura Ace to 7800 Dura Ace and I wanted to make sure I didn't have to change the cleat width on my shoes.  I discovered that on the aero-profile tube of the Cervelo, that this is extremely easy.  You can rotate a crank arm to be in line with the trailing edge of the downtube and then use a tape measure to get the distance to the crank arm.  A round tube would be ambiguous to where the centerline of the spindle would be, but with the an aero-tube, it is a clear cut.  It's kind of cheating, and it may be inaccurate by a mm or two, but I was told at that small of an increment, it's not enough for the body to notice.

 The 7700 crank and the 7800 have exactly the same Q factor.  I don't have a Sram Red one to measure.

BJM:

Redcorn,

Similar to the guys that have preceded me, I appreciate the efforts and opinions you have shared on the forum.

The insights regarding wheels and SRAM has been great.

 I am looking at upgrading my ride around year end.  I would be interested in your insights regarding your Cervelo frame.  I was considering an Orbea Orca (I currently ride an Orbea Dauphine).

 Cheers

Brad

Brad I am not to familiar with the Orbea frames but I know several riders locally that love them to death. I say if you are familiar with your Orbea buy the new Orca it seems to have alot of upgrades and the weight is good for that frame. I am sold on Cervelos or else I would have not bought three of their frames. Let me know if you need a good deal on those Orbea frames I can get you a deal on them.

If I had to pick one Cervelo frame to own it would be the SLC. Save your money and don't get the SL models the cost is not worth it. I have the SLC, R3 and SLC SL and like them all for specific occassions but the SLC would be the best for all around use. R3 is great for climbing, crits, commuting, centuries but it will not be as fast as the SLC or SLC SL over long distances in solo situations. If comfort is your primary goal versus speed go with the R3. If efficiency and speed is your primary concern go with the SLC frames. All three bikes climb great. After riding the SLC frames you can tell aerodynamics makes a big difference when flats and down hills present and you go faster than the R3.  If you ride in a group all the time the R3 would not hurt since you will drafting. When I train alone I use the SLC frames. When I am in a group I use the R3. I would say get the SLC with Sram Red group and your favorite wheels and done deal.

Also in regards to components wait till October-November when people get the new Campy and Shimano in for decisions, but if you had to buy a group now Sram Red is the best as far as being updated and still the lightest even by next year.

Waterstraat:

Redcorn,

I thought this might be helpful for Q factors:  I was switching from 7700 Dura Ace to 7800 Dura Ace and I wanted to make sure I didn't have to change the cleat width on my shoes.  I discovered that on the aero-profile tube of the Cervelo, that this is extremely easy.  You can rotate a crank arm to be in line with the trailing edge of the downtube and then use a tape measure to get the distance to the crank arm.  A round tube would be ambiguous to where the centerline of the spindle would be, but with the an aero-tube, it is a clear cut.  It's kind of cheating, and it may be inaccurate by a mm or two, but I was told at that small of an increment, it's not enough for the body to notice.

 The 7700 crank and the 7800 have exactly the same Q factor.  I don't have a Sram Red one to measure.

I will try it and post. I think its going to be the same as Shimano.

Article on the Vuma Quad cranks confirming my experience with the cranks. I absolutely hated those cranks and had lateral play in the BB under hard loads with soft chain ring issues that caused me to ditch them. Notice the paragraph where they finally said that certain BB shells do not work well with the cranks but when I sent my crankset back to Zipp they denied any problems with BB shell width compatibility or any issues with laterally soft chainrings. My chainrings warped laterally under the load of the chainring bolts. Any slack or preload whether its 1mm or less will show up as noise or lateral movement when you are sprinting or when out of the saddle on a 15% grade hill, Zipp should have designed these to be perfect for the price of 1200.00 I would never let a friend of mine buy these. Two of my friends bought theirs, one folded his chainring and the other broke a tooth on the first ride. The one with the Cervelo had the same knocking noise and warped chainrings due to chainring bolt pressure. Again its all Hype with that company. The crank arms and crank arm BB interface was the stiffest I have ever seen but the lateral movement and weak chainrings voided the benefits. Stick with Shimano, CAMPY and RED if you want the stiffest and most reliable since they are all race proven by the pros.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/tech.php?id=/tech/2008/reviews/zipp_vumaquad_crankset08

Karuna:

Redcorn, What are those bottle cages on your beautiful R3? Where did you get them and what do they weigh? Any problems holding a tall/large water bottle on rough roads? Thanks, Karuna P.S. Why didn't you go with the R3-SL?

I use RavX bottle cages they are the cheapest and lightest I have found at 19gms and they do keep the bottles in very well. They stopped selling my model and now have the RavX beta X models which are even stronger and hold better than my cages. You can find them on Ebay. I believe they are 25gms.

http://search.ebay.com/search/search.dll?from=R40&_trksid=m37&satitle=ravx+beta+x&category0=

As far as buying the R3 SL over the R3 the weight difference was so minimal that the extra money did not justify it. The R3 came in at 910gm out of the box. I also wanted a cheaper frame for commuting, training and crits and did not want to risk damaging a more expensive SL model. I also don't like the way the R3 SL has that taper from the bottom bracket to the seat post going from 32.4 to 27.2 it cosmetically looks funny to me. I would rather put a shim in and keep the seat tube constant.

I am using a Zipp tubular 404 on my P3C. I weigh 180 and ordered the Clydesdale version (28 spokes) of the wheel. I used my tensiometer to check the tension of all the spokes and found the spoke tension to be uniform at 90 kgf. I build most of my wheels myself and favor the Sapim CX-RAY's that Zipp uses on the 404. The front wheels I usually build are also built to the 90 kgf tension spec. The wheel was also laterally true within .5mm (I have electronic gauges on my truing stand); the radial true was a little disapointing at 1mm. Zipp's literature usually talks about carbon rims having a looser tolerance than aluminum wheels. I have built wheels with Zipp rims and have them come out to be as true as the aluminum rimmed wheels I build, I have the time to build my wheels to slightly tighter tolerances (I am also obsessive-compulsive about anything to do with bicycles). The 404 has been working well with no problems.

Waterstraat:

Redcorn,

I thought this might be helpful for Q factors:  I was switching from 7700 Dura Ace to 7800 Dura Ace and I wanted to make sure I didn't have to change the cleat width on my shoes.  I discovered that on the aero-profile tube of the Cervelo, that this is extremely easy.  You can rotate a crank arm to be in line with the trailing edge of the downtube and then use a tape measure to get the distance to the crank arm.  A round tube would be ambiguous to where the centerline of the spindle would be, but with the an aero-tube, it is a clear cut.  It's kind of cheating, and it may be inaccurate by a mm or two, but I was told at that small of an increment, it's not enough for the body to notice.

 The 7700 crank and the 7800 have exactly the same Q factor.  I don't have a Sram Red one to measure.

I measured 148mm for the Q factor of the Sram Red. I did find one professional website that said the Q factor is 149mm but then another site measured theirs at 150mm. I would safely say they are 149mm for sure.

Here is a new crankset review very thorough and mirrors my own testing. The Sram Red is one of the stiffest cranks due to the rings. The big three Sram, Shimano and Campy all were top dogs. FSA did well to. Seems like the companies that sponsor pro teams do well because of constant feed back from field testing where as the companies that are high end boutique cranks don't do as well. Good info.

http://www.fairwheelbikes.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5361

I am surprised they measured the Sram Red cranks as having a Q factor of 150mm. I measured 148mm. I wonder if they got that number from Sram or some other source.

I come back to this review all the time !!!  Thanks Redcorn !!!!

Have you ever tried a set of DT Swiss RR 1450 wheels ? Thank you.

danvert:

Have you ever tried a set of DT Swiss RR 1450 wheels ? Thank you.

I tend to only test wheels in the aerodynamic categories. So I have not tried the DT wheels.

Bicycle computer reviews:

Shimano 6502: Very nice computer for Shimano drive train owners, simple and is feature rich. One of my all time favorites

Pros:

1. Nice integration with Shimano levers and buttons
2. Virtual Cadence eliminates the weight of cadence sensor and keeps bike clean
3. Nice display with the added bonus of showing what gear you are in.
4. Can be set up to not cause extra aero drag on bike.
5. Wireless is clean and easy to set up.
6. Reliable on every ride
7. Cost is reasonable for what you get

Cons: Setup of the head unit to the levers can be tedious but worth it.

Polar 600CS: Very feature rich but setup is a real pain especially if you have the wattage package. I do not recommend getting the WIND power package it is a real pain in the *** to set up and keep set up. Sensors have a hard time starting and stopping reliably on every ride.

Pros:

1. Good info such as calories, grade, zones and timers as well as bike info.
2. Bike functions are easy to set up.
3. Software once mastered are very useful for analysis
4. Easy to sync with PC for uploading data.
5. Good mounting functions.

Cons:

1. All the sensors make your bike look cluttered. I dont like their cadence sensor.
2. WIND power sensors are to involving and makes the bike look loaded. Sensors do not pick up info reliabily.
3. Cost is ridiculous for what you get.
4. Really don't recommend this computer with the wattage functions but for the cycling functions its ok although you can get the CS400 or CS200 for cheaper for that.

Powertap 2.4 SL: Great wattage and computer combo, Easy to set up and clean on the bike.

Pros:

1. Great product and easy to use with good data collection and reliable.
2. Good mounting designs
3. Still one of the best options when you want wattage data.
4. Wattage and all functions are useful.
5. Newer models of the 2.4 will have ANT+ chip to work with Garmin 705
6. Highly recommend this option if SRM is to expensive

Cons:

1. Pricey when you have to build your own favorite wheels for trainning and racing.
2. Limited use due to having to slave to one wheel
3. Software is ok not great

Cateye Strada: Bought this due to its incredibily small size 60 gms total.

Pros:

1. Compact and lightweight
2. Sensors are wireless and easy to setup
3. Cheap and has basic cycling functions
4. I accidently washed the head unit and it came out fine so its water resistant

Cons:

1. Mounting bracket for stem breaks easily as confirmed by several other riders
2. Throw away type computer.
3. Limited info and data

Garmin 705 Edge with City Navigator package: Absolutely one of the most feature packed computers I have ever used. Its my new all time favorite.

Pros:

1. Easy to setup and rear mounted sensor detects both cadence and speed in one sensor so bike is clean and more aero than front mounted sensors. Sensors are reliable on every ride.
2. Well designed mounting brackets that are simple and sturdy
3. Speed is calculated via satellite as well as time so no calibration needed.
4. UP to 8 pieces of data can be setup on any screen and up to 16 different data fields can be shown over two screens. Buttons are very easy to operate and intuitive. Its nice to be able to setup what data you want and where you want it to show up. Lap counters are very nice and easy to access.
5. Uploading via USB is the easiest of all computers and reliable. Online software from www.motionbased.com is awesome it keeps track of your ride and draws it on Google Earth and gives you data as well as weather report for the time of the ride. I was surprised at how the data revealed certain things about my riding that I had no clue about such as pie charts for climbing vs speed vs gradient vs Heartrate and how long you spent in what zones. Info is broken down in new ways that other software have not done before.
6. Virtual partner helps you beat yourself on every ride from the last stored ride similar to what is avaliable on the computrainer.
7. Color screen with good resolution. Display is easy to read and has back lighting for night time.
8. Lithium ion battery is rated for 15 hours but I got 13 hours with heavy use and turning on the back lighting to high for testing.
9. Incorporates the new ANT+ chip which is like standardizing bluetooth so SRM And Powertap can now be used with this unit.
10. Navigation unit can be used in cars, walking and riding.
11. Live gradient display using atmospheric pressure is very accurate and has helped me decide what gears to stay in during long climbs. Much better than Polar unit.
12. Highly recommend this computer its now my all time favorite and helps me improve my riding like the computrainer does. Make sure to buy the delux package so you get the City Navigator software on SD card.

Cons:

1. Price is very high about 550.00 on Ebay but sure beats the polar 600cs for features at less cost.
2. Head unit is largest of all computers at about 60gms but the data and graphics compensates for it.

 SRM power meter and computer: Best power meter period. Durable and reliable. Buy this if you have money to burn or you want to eventually go pro.

Pros:

1. Wireless version is easy to install and effective with good fields of data.
2. Few parts to install
3. Accurate and reliable
4. Newer model works with ANT+ chip so Garmin will work with it
5. Easy to use and good software
6. Can use any wheel combo unlike power tap
7. Great to use as a guide for fitting and testing new wheels, tires and tubes on efficiency

Cons:

1. Heavy if you add the power meter and cranks with computer head
2. Cost is crazy. Not worth it for the amateur rider that will never use it to its full potential. This is definitely a pro level device much like Light weight wheels, Mavic CCU and Lew wheels are for pro category equipment. If your paycheck depends on you winning  on a bike then this is worth it. Power tap can do much of what this can for half the price.
3. Head unit is rather large, I prefer using the Garmin head unit instead

If you don't need navigation then get the Garmin 605 since its the only unit other than the 705 to get the 15 hour rechargeable lithium ion batteries.

Hello Redcorn,

I never read a better article than this one here that you posted.

My question is about stems and handlebars.  I'm 6'-3" and 205 pounds, and I'm scoping an S1 ... the 58cm .. 

I get so much different advcice regarding ( strength, flexibility, longevrity, comfort, weight savings, price ) ... regarding buying Carbon or Aluminum stems and

Handlebars. 

 I ultimately want a comfortable ride by myself for about 3 to 4 hours at  30k per hour.

 If I wanted to keep the price ( stem + bar = 250$ ) .. should I go alu or carbon.

 cheers

Flavio