# Looking for a review of 2009 F1SL



## gregz (Jun 29, 2006)

Can someone who’s ridden the 2009 F1SL please comment on the stiffness of the frame. 

I’m considering buying an XL. The frame is quite light and the XL has long tubes. Those two factors usually create additional flex. I’m specifically concerned with the front end when driving the bike into a corner and the BB when putting more than 1500W into the pedals.

Thanks for the help.


----------



## jm3 (Mar 22, 2003)

Wow, someone who gets it! So very few people understand the two very important points you just made so I'm going to repeat them to drive the point home: 1. laterally stiff front triangles, especially around the head tube/top tube junction, make for better handling bikes, and 2. larger bikes have larger triangles, which can translate to less lateral stiffness when a bike is designed improperly. Everyone (manufacturers) has stiff bottom brackets, so very few pay enough attention to their bikes up front - usually because they want to save weight.

Okay, I got that out of my system. It's a pet peeve of mine, so I get excited when someone else understands the importance of such things.

The F1SL, and the new carbon lay-up used to build it, give it the lateral stiffness of the F1 Sprint without the vertical stiffness the Sprint brings, which is a little much for some. Now, I'll admit this is all according to the engineers at Felt, and I haven't ridden one in my size yet, which would be a 58cm; however, I have ridden a 56cm, and I can report the front felt (sorry for the pun) as solid as my Sprint frame. Hope that helps.


----------



## gibalon (Mar 26, 2009)

I was looking for one myself since am thinking in buying one; The only review i found was at bikeradar and it is for a 2008 F1. They give it 4 and a half stars and the 2009 is supposedly improved.


----------



## Superdave3T (May 11, 2009)

gregz said:


> Can someone who’s ridden the 2009 F1SL please comment on the stiffness of the frame.
> 
> I’m considering buying an XL. The frame is quite light and the XL has long tubes. Those two factors usually create additional flex. I’m specifically concerned with the front end when driving the bike into a corner and the BB when putting more than 1500W into the pedals.
> 
> Thanks for the help.


Our 60 and 61cm bikes are build around a stiffer lay-up to begin with. Great for guys your size, but be advised, a 60cm F1 SL does not weigh 900g, 

It will be closer to 1050g, but it will have the additional stiffness needed for the larger front triangle. In fact, if you compare a 60cm to a 56cm ALL of the tubes on the front triangle are larger, and the radii used to blend the larger tubes together are larger as well.

Ride quality is where the bike will seperate itself from the rest of the "herd". That is something that can't be measured in a lab, but you'll appreciate on hours 3 and 4 on those long days.

Enjoy the quest,
-SD


----------



## gibalon (Mar 26, 2009)

SD, I am really thinking in going for a F1 SL but still wondering if it is the real deal vs. other bikes in it's range. What can you tell me about this bike and is it a better choice than the AR 2?. Knowing in advance these 2 models are different species but focusing in riding qualities.


----------



## Superdave3T (May 11, 2009)

gibalon said:


> SD, I am really thinking in going for a F1 SL but still wondering if it is the real deal vs. other bikes in it's range. What can you tell me about this bike and is it a better choice than the AR 2?. Knowing in advance these 2 models are different species but focusing in riding qualities.


Nothing beats an F1 SL in ride quality. That same frame has been used on the cobbles of Paris Roubaix to a podium finish, and two top 4 placings in the tour. All on the exact same frame.

As to the AR2, the accurate comparison would be the AR1 and AR Team Issue frames. These are similar rides with a slightly harsher ride on the AR due to the rigid aero seatpost. The AR is a better seated climbing bike and gets you about 1 second per mile in aerodynamic savings as well. If you measure your performance in time, the AR is a great bike. If you ride for pleasure I'd stick with the F1.

Tough call if you are doing leisure and occasional races. Maybe you need both. 

-SD


----------



## gibalon (Mar 26, 2009)

Thanks for your reply SD; The F1 certainly attracts me a bit more because in the AR series, i'd be buying the AR2 which in my opinion have not as good wheels as the F1. But in the other hand what confuses me is their geometry; I would've thought the AR to have a steeper ST angle than the F1 and is all the way around when the F1 is supposedly to be a pure road bike and the AR more of a hybrid road/tri bike. My search is for a road bike since my riding zone is rolling to hilly and specially like climbing. For such reason, the F1 attracted me more in the beginning because of it's weight and tube design. I never thought of the AR as an option until i got deeper into geometries and so i gave an AR a chance. But, then i read the bicycling magazine review on the AR and says to forget about it if you are climbing goat when it's ST angle is in a better position for climbing.


----------



## MaddSkillz (Mar 13, 2007)

I can't wait to read reviews for the 2010 F1. That bike is just sexy! Right now I'm considering the Specialized Pro SL and the Felt F1SL for 2010. Either one will be my first carbon bike... So especially excited about that!


----------



## ndtriathlete (Apr 28, 2006)

Not sure if I'd put too much stock in Bicycling's review. I have an AR4 and it climbs just fine. My take on that review is that they were referring more to bike weight than ST angle. That said, I don't know why they would make that comment as the 09 AR2 is plenty light. You may want to wait until Sept. 1 and check out Felt's 2010 lineup. I've heard that there may be some price drops and the paint schemes on the 2010 look GREAT, IMO. Good luck on whatever you choose - you can't go wrong with either one.



gibalon said:


> Thanks for your reply SD; The F1 certainly attracts me a bit more because in the AR series, i'd be buying the AR2 which in my opinion have not as good wheels as the F1. But in the other hand what confuses me is their geometry; I would've thought the AR to have a steeper ST angle than the F1 and is all the way around when the F1 is supposedly to be a pure road bike and the AR more of a hybrid road/tri bike. My search is for a road bike since my riding zone is rolling to hilly and specially like climbing. For such reason, the F1 attracted me more in the beginning because of it's weight and tube design. I never thought of the AR as an option until i got deeper into geometries and so i gave an AR a chance. But, then i read the bicycling magazine review on the AR and says to forget about it if you are climbing goat when it's ST angle is in a better position for climbing.


----------

