# Why does the Pro Team ride the Non-SL stuff?



## mobileops (Oct 20, 2007)

I just bought an SLC-SL after seeing it in the Tour of 2007, I thought the new color scheme and weight advantages were worth the extra money. But why is the CSC team riding both the R3 and Soloist Carbon, not the SL versions in basically all their pro events this year? I can't understand it. Are these SL bikes too light for competition? Does the weight reduction actually cause a stiffness disadvantage, I thought these bikes were stiffer. 

Thanks,
Justin


----------



## sabre104 (Dec 14, 2006)

Probably because the R3 and Soloist can be built under the UCI limit without using the SL models. The SL models are only 100 grams lighter ( +- a gram or 2 ) then the regular models. Only fools like us buy the SL models  
mine that I'm building:
http://forums.roadbikereview.com/showthread.php?t=127199


----------



## twiggy (Mar 23, 2004)

This Q was addressed on the Cervelo site a while back....it actually goes back to economics!....the team just plain can't afford to spend all that money, especially since in most cases the regular non SL versions can be built down to the limit!


----------



## Fivethumbs (Jul 26, 2005)

I thought Cervelo paid CSC to ride their bikes.


----------



## theychosenone (Mar 3, 2006)

At a point I believe CSC would switch to the SLs, probably at the Tour, it would make marketing sense for Cervelo to get them to use all the different carbon models in different parts of the season, so all their models would be perceived as pro-level and sell well. 

Heck I would think it's easy to repaint a SLC-SL frame like the red normal SLC frame scheme, if some riders prefer and are actually using the SLC-SL right now.


----------



## twiggy (Mar 23, 2004)

Fivethumbs said:


> I thought Cervelo paid CSC to ride their bikes.


They do, but money can still be a factor, Cervelo would likely go bankrupt if they were giving the team all SL versions of bikes...consider that each rider has at least 3 bikes, they get replacements for ones involved in crashes or ridden in rough races like the Roubaix, etc....


----------



## mobileops (Oct 20, 2007)

I dont buy the price thing, and here's why. Every other pro bike company's have $5000 frames which the teams use exclusively. I understand a Soloist Carbon, at $2800 can be made at the UCI weight limit and its better, on the replacement and maintenance side, than a $4600 frame. But don't the pros want the 10-15% increased stiffness as well. Even more on the R3-SL. The R3-SL is only $3600. Way below the cost of other frames. The price thing doesnt make any sense to me. These are pro racers. They deserve the best.


----------



## NealH (May 2, 2004)

There is no performance advantage with the SL and, furthermore the non-SL is likely more robust. Nothing worse than a frame cracking in the heat of battle.


----------



## twiggy (Mar 23, 2004)

mobileops said:


> I dont buy the price thing, and here's why. Every other pro bike company's have $5000 frames which the teams use exclusively. I understand a Soloist Carbon, at $2800 can be made at the UCI weight limit and its better, on the replacement and maintenance side, than a $4600 frame. But don't the pros want the 10-15% increased stiffness as well. Even more on the R3-SL. The R3-SL is only $3600. Way below the cost of other frames. The price thing doesnt make any sense to me. These are pro racers. They deserve the best.



I was looking for the exact quote that lead to my comment and I haven't been able to re-find it yet, however cjeck out the March 11, 2007 post on Gerard Vroomen's Blog at http://www.cervelo.com/blogs.aspx?id=gv ...its not was I was looking for but it might answer the original question.....although its quite obvious that the Heirarchy thing wouldn't apply to riders like Fabian and Stuey, who are also still riding non-SL versions.....maybe it has more to do with comfort??....I'll keep looking for the article where they talked about budget before though....


----------



## twiggy (Mar 23, 2004)

Straight from the horse's mouth, Gerard Vroomen of Cervelo:
"BTW, some people asked me why he didn’t ride an SLC-SL, and if it has anything to do with stiffness. The answer is very simple, it has nothing to do with stiffness as the two frames are very similar in that regard. He was not on an SLC-SL because he doesn’t have one. We don’t make too many of those frames, so we try to keep them a little exclusive, even with Team CSC. Now for the Ardennes Classics, one or two CSC riders will use an SLC-SL, other than that they will have to wait until the Grand Tours. "


----------



## SleeveleSS (Jun 3, 2007)

twiggy said:


> Straight from the horse's mouth, Gerard Vroomen of Cervelo:
> "BTW, some people asked me why he didn’t ride an SLC-SL, and if it has anything to do with stiffness. The answer is very simple, it has nothing to do with stiffness as the two frames are very similar in that regard. He was not on an SLC-SL because he doesn’t have one. We don’t make too many of those frames, so we try to keep them a little exclusive, even with Team CSC. Now for the Ardennes Classics, one or two CSC riders will use an SLC-SL, other than that they will have to wait until the Grand Tours. "


I have to call BS on that one. They try to keep the SL exclusive among a pro race team, but will sell them to any weekend recreational rider with the cash? I don't know about that. I am more likely to believe the earlier statements that they are more expensive to make and they don't need that weight savings to get to the UCI minimum.


----------



## mobileops (Oct 20, 2007)

I sorta find that hard to believe. I live in NYC, we have 4 authorized Cervelo dealers in the area, and this is probably a bigger market than most. They all have SL versions in stock in all sizes, and their easy to get. Why wouldn't the pro team, not everyone, but the major guys, be riding this bike. The Tarmac SL2, Pinarello Prince, De Rosa Frames, the Madone 6.9 Pro, their all super priced bikes. I'm just a little concerned that the CSC pro team, arguably the best team on the pro circuit, has the majority of riders on a $2800 frame when they have a more advanced alternative.


----------



## MG537 (Jul 25, 2006)

mobileops said:


> I just bought an SLC-SL after seeing it in the Tour of 2007, I thought the new color scheme and weight advantages were worth the extra money. But why is the CSC team riding both the R3 and Soloist Carbon, not the SL versions in basically all their pro events this year? I can't understand it. Are these SL bikes too light for competition? Does the weight reduction actually cause a stiffness disadvantage, I thought these bikes were stiffer.
> 
> Thanks,
> Justin


If anyone caught yesterday's Amstel Gold race, they would've noticed that Frank Schleck was on SLC-SL, Andy Schleck on an SLC and Karsten Kroon on an R3.
I think it comes down to preference for many riders. I remember seeing Sastre using an R3-SL last year. Every rider has his favorite setup except on cobbles where everyone will use the a bike from the R3 series.
I don't remember seeing anyone on the RS as of yet.


----------



## twiggy (Mar 23, 2004)

SleeveleSS said:


> I have to call BS on that one. They try to keep the SL exclusive among a pro race team, but will sell them to any weekend recreational rider with the cash? I don't know about that. I am more likely to believe the earlier statements that they are more expensive to make and they don't need that weight savings to get to the UCI minimum.


Maybe, but I'm not making this stuff up, Gerard says it on his blog on the Cervelo website.... and he said the same thing last year.... I think last year he worded it a little different, saying something about how they preferred to keep the SL stuff to sell to paying customers, especially seeing as how CSC can build the bikes up with super-lightweight stuff and reach the minimum UCI weight limit without needing their SL frames.... I would also think the durability would be an issue...I've heard a few people crash on their SLC-SLs and have them crack, whereas the regular Soloist Carbon is a bit tougher (so I've heard anyways)...maybe that plays a factor as well?

Anyways, the weight thing brings one good point....why give the racers the SL if they reach the weight limit with the non-SL?


----------



## SleeveleSS (Jun 3, 2007)

twiggy said:


> Maybe, but I'm not making this stuff up, Gerard says it on his blog on the Cervelo website.... and he said the same thing last year.... I think last year he worded it a little different, saying something about how they preferred to keep the SL stuff to sell to paying customers, especially seeing as how CSC can build the bikes up with super-lightweight stuff and reach the minimum UCI weight limit without needing their SL frames.... I would also think the durability would be an issue...I've heard a few people crash on their SLC-SLs and have them crack, whereas the regular Soloist Carbon is a bit tougher (so I've heard anyways)...maybe that plays a factor as well?
> 
> Anyways, the weight thing brings one good point....why give the racers the SL if they reach the weight limit with the non-SL?


Oh, I'm not saying you made it up at all. I'm sure Gerard said it, but that doesn't mean it's true.


----------



## android (Nov 20, 2007)

mobileops said:


> I'm just a little concerned that the CSC pro team, arguably the best team on the pro circuit, has the majority of riders on a $2800 frame when they have a more advanced alternative.


Because some people actually realize that lighter is not equal to more advanced. Also reliability is a huge factor. Even if Cervelo gives over frames for free, the team mechanics still have to do a parts swap from a crashed and cracked bike to a new frame which is going to take an hour or two to do perfectly and get all the adjustments dialed back in. They got plenty of other things to do every night besides rebuild complete bikes.


----------



## California L33 (Jan 20, 2006)

I'd guess, regardless of what Gerard says, that he wants as many models as possible under the riders. That way, regardless of which model falls in a buyer's price range, they can say, "Teams CSC rides my bike."


----------



## mobileops (Oct 20, 2007)

At least they would have changed the color scheme of the Soloist Carbon after 4 years. I like it and all, but a Black version would have suited them nicely. At R and A in Brooklyn I saw one in a Purple color, ugly but different. The guy told me it was a limited Cervelo Production, not a Hot Tubes rendition. Guess its better than way, this colored wasn't pretty.


----------



## boysa (Apr 8, 2007)

Didn't they do something similar last year?... by the Dauphine I bet they are all on the SLC-SL.


----------



## nicks2192 (Jan 25, 2008)

watch the videos on cervelos website the rider gets to pick the frame he likes the best to ride like juan jose uses the r3 and so does fabian, and bobby julich the soloits team its all what they like cause your not gonna ride a bike for over 100 miles a day for 20 days if it rides like crap


----------

