Cervelo S3 wheels problem

[C a s r a n]

I live in Switzerland and i already receive my S3 !!! So they are available.
And i know now that some wheels are not compatible. It is not serious.

Great. What wheelsets have you tried?

S3 will be here in Benelux only at the end of January, and in my size (56) only at the end of February.


Btw: welcome on the forum!

[pierrot]

thank you.
For the moment i have zipp 404 with DT Hubs and no problems.
i have a pair of lightweight too.

But i think it is not serious from Cervelo to not try all market wheels before selling a new frame.

[C a s r a n]

thank you.
For the moment i have zipp 404 with DT Hubs and no problems.
i have a pair of lightweight too.

But i think it is not serious from Cervelo to not try all market wheels before selling a new frame.

So good to hear Zipp404-DT and Lightweights (same hub in fact) do work. Thx. Reassuring to me.

I think these things just happen (Campagnolo launched UT cranksets that weren't compatible to some frames and sizes either!), and are indeed very unpleasant. We'll see how big the problem turns out to be.

[NAVAHO]

It is not serious sell the chassis without wheels not say what we are fine ...

If you want Cervelo can solve the problem ...
A leader is always the solution!

[Ypsylon]

Maybe you could post in Italian as well as in English. It seems the word "leader" just doesn't translate right.

I understand that a bike should be compatible with all standard wheelsets. If not this should be communicated as soon as possible. If you can not use the wheels of you choice, they should either give you your money back or trade your wheels for some that work and will satisfy you. Their call on which they do, though.

[mattr]

there are half a dozen brake/hub/wheel/fork combinations that simply won't work on MTBs. Not enough space.

And some frames won't take particular rear calipers.

No-one is particularly up in arms about this.

And AFAIK, the 'compatibility' matrix has usually been worked out on forums and by shops. (Before the manufacturer finally admits an issue)

[c50jim]

My LBS got in an S3 with the Olympic paint job for a customer and built it with SR11 for an open house where all the manufacturers whose stuff they sell sent their reps. They tried to build it with Mavic R-Sys, I believe, and it just wouldn't go. The poor Cervelo guy asked them to switch out the wheels but the mechanics enjoyed his discomfit and didn't switch. When I was in the shop the other day, the frame was hanging on a peg with no parts on it.

There is very little clearance on the stays - their shape is almost flat. If you had a broken spoke with any wheel, you'd have a problem. It looks like another Cervelo recall will ultimately come out of this one (or a running design change).

[justkeepedaling]

Wheel compatibility has been something that has piqued my curiousity with Cervelo. While I am not as concerned for the S3 since 2009 wheelsets were probably mostly unknown to Cervelo and I personally think the R-SYS is a POS, the fact that they did not make the P4 able to fit the Sub 9 despite a close relationship with Zipp imo, says either that they tested their design with the standard flat disk and found it as a more aerodynamic system than having to increase the separation and change the shape of the chainstays and or seatstays to accomodate bulging disks or found that the Sub 9 isn't all that aero when it is mounted with a frame or simple negligence. The problem is that I don't know how the engineers thought when they were designing the rear triangles/sections of these frames. It would certainly be enlightening

[cyclenutnz]

My LBS got in an S3 ..... They tried to build it with Mavic R-Sys,

They're really showing their intelligence by putting the worst wheels on the best frame. Maybe Cervelo wanted to stop people from ruining the bikes with rubbish wheels...

JKP - I'd wondered the same thing about the Sub9. Given the level of parts integration that they have been working towards it would be a big surprise if the wheels weren't considered as part of it. I suspect that they're working on the principle that anyone using the P4 properly is not going to experience the high yaw angles where the Sub9 shines thus there is no real world advantage to the wheel.

[2002SaecoReplica]

I get the idea of trying to make a really aerodynamic road frame but what use is it when you have <2mm of clearance for most wheels and some wheels that won't clear at all?

Zipp wheels are compatible depending on rider weight and style?

So if I'm not some lazy fat ass my Zipp's spokes are going to get mangled by my chain stay?

[Danton]

They're really showing their intelligence by putting the worst wheels on the best frame. Maybe Cervelo wanted to stop people from ruining the bikes with rubbish wheels...

Like Campagnolo Boras and Hyperons too? This sounds so stupid, a road bike that can't take a range of road wheels. I know they are trying to push things as aero as possible, and a "no compromise" attitude is good but surely this is stupid? As a business they will have fewer customers and the frame will have fewer riders.

What if you race and need a service wheel, the mechanic fits it... or he can't!

[lone wheeler]

Race?!?!? this is weight weenies........

[lite pete]

ive not seen one but im assuming the issue will be the bottom bracket area. or do the chainstays sweep in to the wheel.

why dont the chainstays on bikes just come off the edge of the bb shell in a straight line to the dropout ?

they are not building space ships and to honest how much aero advantage can it have with your cranks whizzing round at 100 rpm

[aeroslave]

Cervelo is a leader, then we expect a solution by Cervelo Lader.
But certainly the communication was done using retardation ...

Who is Cervelo Lader? How did they use retardation? What the hell...speak english!

[HammerTime2]

Cervelo is a leader, then we expect a solution by Cervelo Lader.
But certainly the communication was done using retardation ...

Who is Cervelo Lader? How did they use retardation? What the hell...speak english!

aeroslave and others: Please show some consideration for non-native English speakers (using online translators) and for what appears to be a legitimate concern.

I think NAVAHO is trying to say that Cervelo is an industry leader - producing high end cutting edge products, and if their frame (S3) has a non-standard limitation in the rear wheels which can be used, Cervelo should have clearly announced (communicated) that up front before they started taking orders, rather than only announcing it later (i.e., with retardation). I'm not clear if NAVAHO is saying that as a a leader, Cervelo should find a solution (other than refunding any deposit made before the wheel limitation had been communicated).