Cervelo Soloist

[Dweez]

hi folks,

im thinking of buying a seperatly bike for classics ons good roads
thinking of the aero subject, my choice would be the soloist.

thirst question:
is the carbon the money worth? or should i take the team version?

second question:
will use zipp 404/606 combi, good choice?

third:
has someone here, a picture of an 61 cm of a soloist. doesnt make any diff in geometry, the team of carbon! if you got one, plz with 45/50 mm wheels!

thanks alot for reading! christian

[nouseforaname]

I have the Aluminum Soloist and it rides like a truck. 2hr ride feels like I rode 2.5hrs

but it looks cool and all the pros love it

as soon as I find time, its going on ebay.

[Hyde]

The Carbon Soloist is an awesome ride in my opinion. If I were to build a serious "Ultimate" race bike it would either be a Soloist or a Ridley Noah. I have ridden a friend's Soloist a few times. It is a very well balanced frame that rides comfortably & slices the wind well for descents. Has has owned both the Aluminum & Carbon versions of the frame. He says there is no comparison, the Carbon is worth the money.

[BMOLLOY]

The Carbon Soloist is a great bike, but if you are looking for a bike that has that "carbon" feel (taking out all of the road buzz) the SLC is not the best bike for that. The very first thing I noticed when I switched from my R2.5 to the Soloist was how stiff vertically it was, it almost felt like I was back on an aluminum bike. That being said I think it is important to remember that this bike was developed with the help of the guys on CSC and pro racers always did love their super stiff aluminum frames. I wonder if the peleton would still be filled with aluminum bikes if carbon had not become the rage.

I think you will be happy with either choice. (I would go for the '06 Aluminum Soloist over the '07 if you choose aluminum, I am not a fan of the new grayish anodized look. I was looking at one today in a bike shop and think they should have stuck with black.

[2oldnslow]

Can,t say its the most comfortable bike (whatever that is) but to say

"I have the Aluminum Soloist and it rides like a truck. 2hr ride feels like I rode 2.5hrs" seems to me a bit harsh but they we all have different tastes/needs.

I'm old with a slightly dodgy lower back and for my 3-4 hour rides on good roads I choose my Soloist Team just about every time over my carbon Giant TCR. Horses for courses I suppose but I wouldn't describe it as harsh in anyway. having said that I still lust for the Carbon

[jimbonnet]

I had a soloist team, sold it and got a bmc road racer... I wish I had the soloist back! I wouldn't say that the soloist rides like a truck at all. If the soloist is a truck the bmc is a honda with cut springs

[DocRay]

I have the Aluminum Soloist and it rides like a truck. 2hr ride feels like I rode 2.5hrs

but it looks cool and all the pros love it

as soon as I find time, its going on ebay.

this is trolling, I'm sure anyone who actually has this frame would disagree.

[SirVelo]

I agree with Doc ... I've been enjoying my Soloist Team since early 2004. The ride is firm, but to say it rides like a truck is way off.

The one criticism that I would have is that the aluminum frame is a little on the heavy side, but I guess that's part of the price you pay for being aero... it also makes being a WW that much more challenging and fun though!

[DocRay]

hi folks,

im thinking of buying a seperatly bike for classics ons good roads
thinking of the aero subject, my choice would be the soloist.

thirst question:
is the carbon the money worth? or should i take the team version?

Is the CF frame good? yes. worth the extra $3300? No.
Put that money into wheels and a good gruppo, you'll have a better bike in the end.

[tofu]

I think Cervelos are excellent bikes and I have been tempted for quite some time to get a soloist as my primary road race bike, but when I think about the benefits of a bike with aero tubing for road racing I really can't justify the current cost of the Carbon or Carbon SL. All the wind tunnel research I have read shows aero tubing cuts an excellent rider's 40K ITT time by about 1.7% in ideal conditions. In real world conditions, I am guessing this is probably closer to 1%, which is still a major amount time in an individual time trial.

However, in a mass start road race the difference is probably negligible given that you will be riding with peloton for a large portion of the time and even if you make a solo break you can't achieve as aero a position on a road bike as a time trial setup (plus you can't wear aero helmets) so your body is creating a lot more drag and your frame accounts for much less drag percentage wise than in an ITT. Thus, ideal savings are going to be much less than 1% and even then its only for the portion of time you are out front. Plus, carrying water bottles and the hillier profile of most road stages makes me think aero frame savings for road races are basically nil. The Soloist Carbon rides like a dream though, so regardless if its aero tubing helps or not, it is still one of the best frames you can buy. I think the R3 rides a little better though, plus it is cheaper and lighter so I personally would recommend it over the Soloist Carbon.

[CharlesM]

It handled well (not like a truck) and put the power down very well. It felt much lighter than the 17+ pounds (built in team trim, with full DA and FSA team parts, Medium) as the weight was nicely down low...

It's very stiff and the trade off for the great power delivery is that it's not as comfortable as some others in the top line performace group of bikes.

[wogamax]

It's very stiff and the trade off for the great power delivery is that it's not as comfortable as some others in the top line performace group of bikes.

I wasn't a believer in the seperation of vertical compliance and bottom bracket stiffness, as qualities, until I got on frames like the Seven and the R3. I'm sure PezTech knows this, too, but I thought it worth pointing out that the trade off on today's best frames isn't what it used to be. The R3 is comfy, for a race bike, and extremely stiff with power transfer.

[tofu]

It's very stiff and the trade off for the great power delivery is that it's not as comfortable as some others in the top line performace group of bikes.

I wasn't a believer in the seperation of vertical compliance and bottom bracket stiffness, as qualities, until I got on frames like the Seven and the R3. I'm sure PezTech knows this, too, but I thought it worth pointing out that the trade off on today's best frames isn't what it used to be. The R3 is comfy, for a race bike, and extremely stiff with power transfer.

I totally agree with you here. In general the shape of aero tubing makes it too stiff in some dimensions and not stiff enough in others. You can mostly overcome this in a carbon frame by using different composite layup techniques, but in an aluminum frame you don't have this option. This is one reason why the Soloist Carbon has higher bb and torsional stiffness but overall provides a much better ride than the Soloist Team. My main gripe with the Soloist Team is I don't think aero tubing buys you anything time-wise in a road race and you end up paying for it in ride quality as the frame has too much vertical stiffness and not enough lateral stiffness and torsion. On top of that the frame cost $1300 which is more than most aluminum frames. That is why I would go with an R3 if you are willing to spend more or a something like a Cannondale CAAD8 or 9 if you want to a great aluminum frame with plenty of bb stiffness, a compliant ride and at the same time cost less than the Soloist Team.

[DocRay]

It's very stiff and the trade off for the great power delivery is that it's not as comfortable as some others in the top line performace group of bikes.

I wasn't a believer in the seperation of vertical compliance and bottom bracket stiffness, as qualities, until I got on frames like the Seven and the R3. I'm sure PezTech knows this, too, but I thought it worth pointing out that the trade off on today's best frames isn't what it used to be. The R3 is comfy, for a race bike, and extremely stiff with power transfer.

My only compliant with the team soloist was the flexy BB, but I'm at 6'4" and 88 kilos. But it was still stiffer torsionally and at the BB than any Ti frame I tried.
My new R3 is definitely more compliant, but very much stiffer in the BB and the head tube, the difference is huge. I remember the first time I rode away off the saddle thinking, "oh god, this bike is going to kill me" but a few hours later, I was amazed.
Anyone who says that there isn't a fundamental advantage in a good CF frame for comfort , power transfer, and handling over metal frames has never ridden one.

The aero aspects has always struck me as a gimmick for a road bike, it makes sense at high-end TT competition, but real-world road racing, I'm not convinced.