CN Best Team Bike 2011

[RDV4ROUBAIX]

How about neither? Moreover, the only $5,000 Colnago is one built in Taiwan. A $2,500 aluminum S1 will ride circles around that little Italian-Asian gem. The trashing of Cervelo and the like on this thread is interesting. I do have some doubts about their quality control when it comes to carbon frames. As an owner of the original Soloist, I can attest that it is built right, and is a damn fine bike. I rode some of Italy's finest for 15 years, and after one ride on the Soloist, I knew it was a better bike. You can talk about falling for marketing and hype when it comes to the latest aero frame from Cervelo (or Specialized, Scott, or Ridley for that matter). However, what about falling for the marketing and hype when it comes to buying an Italian "work of art". Colnagos are good bikes, but dear Lord they aren't worth the dollars that Ernesto wants for them. If you want to spend $9,000 on a lugged carbon frame with spiders painted on it, and because Merckx rode one, go ahead, but don't scream about all the suckers falling for marketing hype.

Also, the aero thing isn't really hype. If you think so, then do your next time trial on your Colnago with spiders on it. Just be prepared to get passed by riders on aero bikes. There is an upside, however. The more you get passed, the more people will appreciate the cool spiders, and what is, effectively, a $3,000 paint job.

The question wasn't about country of origin, it was about who'd you rather give money to, hybrid makers or road race builders. Thanks for the advice, but I've been riding and racing Colnagos for almost 16 years, so yeah, I'm a little biased. I don't think Colnago is such a bad bike to be biased about, unless of course you have the spider web paint job I guess. BTW, I don't pay retail, if I had to for a Colnago I'd have to find a different line of work.

Could care less about aero either, never said it doesn't matter, just doesn't matter to me.

 

[LugHugger]

How about neither? Moreover, the only $5,000 Colnago is one built in Taiwan. A $2,500 aluminum S1 will ride circles around that little Italian-Asian gem. The trashing of Cervelo and the like on this thread is interesting. I do have some doubts about their quality control when it comes to carbon frames. As an owner of the original Soloist, I can attest that it is built right, and is a damn fine bike. I rode some of Italy's finest for 15 years, and after one ride on the Soloist, I knew it was a better bike. You can talk about falling for marketing and hype when it comes to the latest aero frame from Cervelo (or Specialized, Scott, or Ridley for that matter). However, what about falling for the marketing and hype when it comes to buying an Italian "work of art". Colnagos are good bikes, but dear Lord they aren't worth the dollars that Ernesto wants for them. If you want to spend $9,000 on a lugged carbon frame with spiders painted on it, and because Merckx rode one, go ahead, but don't scream about all the suckers falling for marketing hype.

Also, the aero thing isn't really hype. If you think so, then do your next time trial on your Colnago with spiders on it. Just be prepared to get passed by riders on aero bikes. There is an upside, however. The more you get passed, the more people will appreciate the cool spiders, and what is, effectively, a $3,000 paint job.

We were talking about 5K frames, not bikes. Neither the C59 or EPQ are made in Taiwan. They are hand made in Italy. Whether they are worth 5k is debatable, I agree. But they are better value and better frames than an R5, that is for sure. Let's not get started on the R5ca or Project One at 9K+.

Your TT comment is risible. Apply your argument in reverse - good luck keeping up in the mountains on your TT bike. It's a ridiculous and pointless argument. Do aero frames win every rouleur's stage? No. The benefits of aero design are just marketing hype outside of the wind tunnel in real racing conditions.

I've ridden in plenty of 25k TT's where old timers on steel frames with flat backs and a disc wheel have kicked the backsides of riders on the latest 5k frame with 3k wheels.

 

[laziali]

lol, I should have explained, but i was pushed for time.
Find any tech tests, these bikes are relatively heavy and flexible, and expensive. Colnago started well with the c40, and equally time with their lugged frame, but then they seemed to stagnate. The geometry is tested over time and can't be questioned, but they've fallen behind in my opinion.
In fact if you want to point me to the victories then it's specialized, giant, trek and cannondale for 2011.
So this is where you all tell me that it's the man not the bike, it's not just about weight and stiffness and you are right, but in my opinion time, and colnago haven't kept up. Having said, that really only means they aren't using monocoques and have kept their tube diameters smaller, which appeals to all the traditionalists.
For reference, I'll take the SL3 of the venge, the r series over the s series cervelos, and f over ar for felt. Given an unlimited budget there's a good chance I'd buy a storck.

LOL, you haven't ridden a Colnago, have you karlboss? Now got back to the Clinic like a good boy where expressing opinions without direct experience is de rigeur

 

[laziali]

The question wasn't about country of origin, it was about who'd you rather give money to, hybrid makers or road race builders. Thanks for the advice, but I've been riding and racing Colnagos for almost 16 years, so yeah, I'm a little biased. I don't think Colnago is such a bad bike to be biased about, unless of course you have the spider web paint job I guess. BTW, I don't pay retail, if I had to for a Colnago I'd have to find a different line of work.

Could care less about aero either, never said it doesn't matter, just doesn't matter to me.

22 years on Colnagos in my case, so I am really biased

Just a clue, "Soloist" was on only his 3rd post ever when he came on to this thread to complain against "Cervelo bashing" and defend the indefensible. Fishy, much?

 

[Polyarmour]

If an aero frame delivers 20W at 40km/h I'll take it thanks. It took me a year of hard training to raise my FTP by 20W. To suggest that this doesn't make a difference in a race is just unbelievable nonsense. If I had a 20W parachute would you be happy to wear it during a race? I mean it makes no difference right? The future for road bikes is all about being aero, those manufacturers that are not across this are going to be left behind. You keep your quaint steel or carbon hand made boutique status symbols. I want the latest technology.

 

[LugHugger]

If an aero frame delivers 20W at 40km/h I'll take it thanks. It took me a year of hard training to raise my FTP by 20W. To suggest that this doesn't make a difference in a race is just unbelievable nonsense. If I had a 20W parachute would you be happy to wear it during a race? I mean it makes no difference right? The future for road bikes is all about being aero, those manufacturers that are not across this are going to be left behind. You keep your quaint steel or carbon hand made boutique status symbols. I want the latest technology.

That figure is the best W benefit at optimum yaw. If you believe that you're going to derive that benefit over an hour, or even 3 hours, you're deluding yourself. If you think that will impact on your overall finishing position, you're even more delusional.

 

[veganrob]

If an aero frame delivers 20W at 40km/h I'll take it thanks. It took me a year of hard training to raise my FTP by 20W. To suggest that this doesn't make a difference in a race is just unbelievable nonsense. If I had a 20W parachute would you be happy to wear it during a race? I mean it makes no difference right? The future for road bikes is all about being aero, those manufacturers that are not across this are going to be left behind. You keep your quaint steel or carbon hand made boutique status symbols. I want the latest technology.

Yes, aero is a very good thing. However aero frames do not deliver anything, you have to pedal it. And all the wind tunnel testing by all the manufacturers so they can claim theirs is the fastest. Hogwash. Where the real difference comes in is ride quality. Cervelo is the most uninspiring, cold piece of carbon that ever hit the road. But don't let it hit too hard though because it will most certainly break. Colnago, Pinarello, Willier and the like are built with passion. It is about the ride. I will get from point A to point B faster and feeling better on one of these than a Cervelo. Example.
I ride a Look 595. I love this bike. It is smooth, responsive, I can ride it all day long. I had an S2 that was a year old in the store so I thought I would keep it for crit bike. After riding it 7 miles down the road, turned back and hung the bike back up and sold it at cost. Finally. Then I checked to see if all my filings were still in my mouth. Terrible. Unridable bike.
I will not argue the benefits of aero but will certainly argue ride quality and durability.

 

[RDV4ROUBAIX]

If an aero frame delivers 20W at 40km/h I'll take it thanks. It took me a year of hard training to raise my FTP by 20W. To suggest that this doesn't make a difference in a race is just unbelievable nonsense. If I had a 20W parachute would you be happy to wear it during a race? I mean it makes no difference right? The future for road bikes is all about being aero, those manufacturers that are not across this are going to be left behind. You keep your quaint steel or carbon hand made boutique status symbols. I want the latest technology.

What you're dubbing as "the latest technology" is marketing fluff, because most of it does ride like absolute crap. Super aero and super stiff, what a combo. I don't ride in a wind tunnel testing facility because none of that bs translates to the real world, and I like to finish rides and races with a smile on my face, not as if I had just been riding a jackhammer for 5 hours.

How did Thomas Voeckler place just off the podium in the TDF this year on a decidedly un-aero boutique bike? Do you really think because his C59 is less aero than most? How about the winner of the white jersey, Pierre Rolland. You think he won the white jersey because his boutique Colnago M10 is slightly more aero than a C59? You look down the list and there's much more aero and lighter bikes, shouldn't they be at the very top?

I don't know man, the skeptical eye has made a return.

 

[elapid]

Yes, aero is a very good thing. However aero frames do not deliver anything, you have to pedal it. And all the wind tunnel testing by all the manufacturers so they can claim theirs is the fastest. Hogwash. Where the real difference comes in is ride quality. Cervelo is the most uninspiring, cold piece of carbon that ever hit the road. But don't let it hit too hard though because it will most certainly break. Colnago, Pinarello, Willier and the like are built with passion. It is about the ride. I will get from point A to point B faster and feeling better on one of these than a Cervelo. Example.
I ride a Look 595. I love this bike. It is smooth, responsive, I can ride it all day long. I had an S2 that was a year old in the store so I thought I would keep it for crit bike. After riding it 7 miles down the road, turned back and hung the bike back up and sold it at cost. Finally. Then I checked to see if all my filings were still in my mouth. Terrible. Unridable bike.
I will not argue the benefits of aero but will certainly argue ride quality and durability.

+1. I fell for the marketing hype a while back and bought a Cervelo R3. Sold it within 6 months. Despite a professional fitting, I felt beat up after 80km+ rides. I'm now back to my custom titanium Lynskey road bike - about 1lb heavier (for what that's worth), but oh so much more comfortable and enjoyable to ride. Whether I am racing, touring, or just out for a ride, it is about enjoying the ride for me and super stiff bikes don't provide the ride quality or enjoyment factor for me. (To be honest, I am also not sure if I could personally feel the difference in stiffness between my Lynskey and an S5 when it counts, I definitely could not when putting 1000W on either the Lynskey and R3 during sprints).

 

[RDV4ROUBAIX]

I've ridden in plenty of 25k TT's where old timers on steel frames with flat backs and a disc wheel have kicked the backsides of riders on the latest 5k frame with 3k wheels.

This is the point! Aero, weight, stiffness, blah, blah, blah. You can tell who the Tri-geeks are who enter this discussion because that's all that matters to them, regurgitating marketing strategies from the mfg's. At the pinnacle of my racing career, the few stage races I entered that featured a TT I was smoking people that were riding dedicated TT bikes, more aero, lighter, and way more stiff. All I was doing was adding homemade aero bars and deeper section wheels to my Colnagos which were far less aero and pounds heavier than the people who I was up against. Why? My years of track racing translated well to TT's, the bike didn't matter a lick.

 

[oldborn]

We were talking about 5K frames, not bikes. Neither the C59 or EPQ are made in Taiwan. They are hand made in Italy. Whether they are worth 5k is debatable, I agree. But they are better value and better frames than an R5, that is for sure. Let's not get started on the R5ca or Project One at 9K+.

Your TT comment is risible. Apply your argument in reverse - good luck keeping up in the mountains on your TT bike. It's a ridiculous and pointless argument. Do aero frames win every rouleur's stage? No. The benefits of aero design are just marketing hype outside of the wind tunnel in real racing conditions.

I've ridden in plenty of 25k TT's where old timers on steel frames with flat backs and a disc wheel have kicked the backsides of riders on the latest 5k frame with 3k wheels.

Maybe you are far more stronger than those riders on 5k frame, if you were racing against Wiggins and he was riding DH bike with some fat *** tyres, he will kick your *** while you are riding P4 or something.
But if Wiggins racing against Martin forget about DH bike, every little things matter, it is no obvious for regular joe, but you can not really denied aero benefits IMHO.
So bike alone will not make you faster, but with equal endurance fitness it might be a winning combo.

How Colnago are handmade? You or I could never afford it, they are not handmade, or what does it mean?
You mean 3000 paint job?

 

[RDV4ROUBAIX]

How Colnago are handmade? You or I could never afford it, they are not handmade, or what does it mean?
You mean 3000 paint job?

The C59 and EPQ are handmade in the basement of Ernesto's house in Cambiago, Italy. Oldnews, get used to the price, since the beginning Colnago as always been more expensive than most.

 

[oldborn]

The C59 and EPQ are handmade in the basement of Ernesto's house in Cambiago, Italy. Oldnews, get used to the price, since the beginning Colnago as always been more expensive than most.

It must be hell of a basement with 10 000 bikes per year production, oh wait Ernesto must hired all local paisanos for that job and they are happy and singing, carrying red wine, prosciutto and parmigiano while producing tons of plastic frames.
Dude just can not buy it, that Italian passion
Instead you settlers support your local economy and US fine bikes, you are killing it. Chinese are coming dude get over it, response now.

 

[RDV4ROUBAIX]

It must be hell of a basement with 10 000 bikes per year production, oh wait Ernesto must hired all local paisanos for that job and they are happy and singing, carrying red wine, prosciutto and parmigiano while producing tons of plastic frames.
Dude just can not buy it, that Italian passion
Instead you settlers support your local economy and US fine bikes, you are killing it. Chinese are coming dude get over it, response now.

Colnago's basement.
http://www.roadbikeaction.com/New-Releases/content/67/4590/Being-There-The-Colnago-Factory-Tour.html

Don't worry about me and my support for my economy, when it comes time to replace my CX bike at the end of next summer I'll be going local, one of a hundred ways how I do already on a daily basis. Where are you again, Croatia? Is speaking from the pulpit and making blanket statements about supporting our local US economy common practice there?

 

[oldborn]

Colnago's basement.
http://www.roadbikeaction.com/New-Releases/content/67/4590/Being-There-The-Colnago-Factory-Tour.html

Don't worry about me and my support for my economy, when it comes time to replace my CX bike at the end of next summer I'll be going local, one of a hundred ways how I do already on a daily basis. Where are you again, Croatia? Is speaking from the pulpit and making blanket statements about supporting our local US economy common practice there?

As I said before hell of a factory sorry basement Only Barrique wine barrels are somehow missing here
I am not sure about your question but we just do not care, Chinese or US settlers, Germans or Austrians we just hate them all
Could you just paraphrase last question and I would answer better or just forget about it.

 

[oldborn]

"Back in the day the factory churned out 10,000 steel frames a year. The number is now down to about 800." Quote from article about Colnago basement.
Give me a break, 2,1 bikes per day, that is even to much for Cervelo PR
Have nothing against Colnagos it is my next buy probably, but come on 800 bikes per year

 

[RDV4ROUBAIX]

"Back in the day the factory churned out 10,000 steel frames a year. The number is now down to about 800." Quote from article about Colnago basement.
Give me a break, 2,1 bikes per day, that is even to much for Cervelo PR
Have nothing against Colnagos it is my next buy probably, but come on 800 bikes per year

Oldbuddy I don't mean to berate you about this anymore, but the in-house production numbers from the article are for 2 models only, C59 mentioned, and the EPQ which wasn't, both lugged carbon. Of course back in the days of steel when Colnago usually had half the pro peloton sponsored the production numbers where much higher, and steel frames are far more efficient to produce than carbon. Apples and oranges.

 

[RDV4ROUBAIX]

I'm going to make a lot of people angry with this next comment about carbon aero frames, but I don't care. I'm 99% certain that Cadel Evens still wins the TDF on a non-carbon, non-aero machine like a Moots Vamoots RSL instead of his BMC. Vansummeren still wins Roubaix on a Cinelli XCR instead of his Cervelo. Consider the remaining 1% a Christmas gift.

 

[Polyarmour]

At the pinnacle of my racing career, the few stage races I entered that featured a TT I was smoking people that were riding dedicated TT bikes, more aero, lighter, and way more stiff. All I was doing was adding homemade aero bars and deeper section wheels to my Colnagos which were far less aero and pounds heavier than the people who I was up against. Why? My years of track racing translated well to TT's, the bike didn't matter a lick.

So why does Fabian ride a dedicated TT bike?
No wonder he lost the last Worlds to Tony.
He fell for the marketing hype too.
It's back to the track for him... and a Colnago roadbike ;-).

 

[RDV4ROUBAIX]

For pro level TT's sure go aero as possible and wear the sperm helmet, everything, you're getting paid to win. Not at local club level, most of those stand alone TT's nowdays are populated by Tri-geeks anyway, I stay away for ethical reasons. But for a RR, nope, no way. Majority of your time is in the draft of someone else, slight variances in aerodynamics from frame to frame mean nothing but to people who put too much credence in manufacturers claims about how much better their stuff looks like in a wind tunnel. Are you being paid to race TT's? If so go aero then.

 

[Polyarmour]

The question is not whether Voeckler did well without an aero bike but how he would have done with one. His Stage 9 breakaway comes to mind plus there were other breakaway attempts as I recall. I'm sure he would have appreciated an extra 20W.

There is no point comparing a rider with an aero bike to another rider without one, they are two different riders.

 

[maltiv]

Well Gabriel Rasch's biggest regret about getting omitted from Garmin-Cervelo was that he would have to replace his cervelo with FDJ's bike...and he said this after the contract with FDJ was announced, so not exactly a wise thing to say for him personally either, just plain honesty.

Hushovd has also said (that too after leaving cervelo) that the biggest difference for him in the classics nowadays vs at credit agricole (where he was fairly unspectacular on the cobbles) is that the equipment of cervelo is much better (that might say more about Look though).

The cervelo bike has produced an insane amount of unexpectedly good results on the cobbles in P-R, having won 3/5 of the last P-R's (2 of which were quite surprising) and podium in the 2 remaining.

 

[Polyarmour]

For pro level TT's sure go aero as possible and wear the sperm helmet, everything, you're getting paid to win. Not at local club level, most of those stand alone TT's nowdays are populated by Tri-geeks anyway, I stay away for ethical reasons. But for a RR, nope, no way. Majority of your time is in the draft of someone else, slight variances in aerodynamics from frame to frame mean nothing but to people who put too much credence in manufacturers claims about how much better their stuff looks like in a wind tunnel. Are you being paid to race TT's? If so go aero then.

While your in the peloton an aero bike isn't doing much for you I agree. But even during a RR there are many times where being aero is critical.

1/. When you're leading the peloton. I mean someone has to do the work and if you're doing it you want to burn as few matches as possible.
2/. When you bridge across. You try to stay in the peloton but a gap opens up in front of you and the next thing you know you're having to put in some hard yards to get back on.
3/. In the breakaway situation.
4/. In the sprint.

If you lose a race by a half wheel because you're absolutely spent, you don't start to think about all those situations above and how things might have been if you were a bit more aero?

 

[elapid]

There is no point comparing a rider with an aero bike to another rider without one, they are two different riders.

I disagree. One, in a RR, 99% of professional riders spend their time sheltered and hence aero is of no advantage. Two, 20W is for an elite professional cyclist in a wind tunnel. The wind tunnel does not equate to real life conditions with wind direction, hills, position on the bike (especially after a gruelling day in the saddle), etc. There was an MIT study a little while ago which showed some of the biggest advantages in watt saving on the bike was not wearing gloves and the type of helmet you wear. But I don't see amateurs or professionals adopting these changes to save a few watts, mainly because in the grand scheme of things these don't matter, especially in a RR.

A cyclist, whether professional or not, is still the same rider regardless of the bike they are riding. Bringing the thread back on topic, for non-professionals, the $10K+ bike, whether it is aero or not, is just for show because the same rider will not perform any better than on a $3K bike IMO. Same for the weight weenies ... how much money one can spend on dropping grams of a bike is more for bragging rights than performance.

 

[RDV4ROUBAIX]

The question is not whether Voeckler did well without an aero bike but how he would have done with one. His Stage 9 breakaway comes to mind plus there were other breakaway attempts as I recall. I'm sure he would have appreciated an extra 20W.

There is no point comparing a rider with an aero bike to another rider without one, they are two different riders.

You put too much faith in the machine Polyarmour, sorry. The difference between a C59 and a TCR Advanced was not the reason Voeckler lost stage 9. No way, not a chance. Sanchez still wins stage 9 on a custom Baum Romano.