# 2010 Scott CR1 Pro vs Cervelo RS



## laxcheeks (Jan 6, 2006)

I am looking at either the new 2010 Scott CR1 or the Cervelo RS. Looking for an agressive but comfy ride as a great all around bike. Any help is appreciated.


----------



## Lazyrider (Sep 15, 2004)

laxcheeks said:


> I am looking at either the new 2010 Scott CR1 or the Cervelo RS. Looking for an agressive but comfy ride as a great all around bike. Any help is appreciated.


Cervelo RS for sure. Scotts are not known for comfort.


----------



## SeattleRider (Jun 17, 2009)

Ohhhh, really good question. I was about to pose it myself. Have you test ridden either? I rode the CR1 Pro yesterday and loved it. I was looking for bumps to hit just to actually feel anything. The ride was so smooth and so easy to spin up and gain momentum. I have not tested the RS, but hope to this week. For the price the Scott looks like a better value. About $600 difference in my area with Ultegra. Regarding geometry, bikes in this category seem to be within millimeters, but the CR1 looks to be more aggressive on paper. What I like about the CR1 is that it's new for 2010 so therefore all tweaked with latest tech (add that to all new Ultegra = great time to be buying a bike in this category); the Cervelo is a proven ride, but little changed over the years and kinda boring to look at. I'm looking at the XXL and I am concerned about trail, but the bike seemed to handle well without being too twitchy.

Have you considered the Giant Defy Advanced? Almost identical to the RS geometry, maybe a bit more relaxed, and reviewers seem to love it. I plan to throw that one into the mix as well.

Warranty may be a factor as well. Scott 3 years, most other lifetime (or so I've heard). I wonder if Scott still has that crash replacement program for bikes as cost. that would trump a lifetime warranty in my opinion.

Anyway, good luck and I hope we receive some sage advice.


----------



## estone2 (Sep 25, 2005)

A quote I once heard about Scott...
"Scotts ride like a wooden board on wheels."
It wasn't a good thing.

I'd say Cervelo for sure. Check out the C'dale Synapse too, I rode one once, and if I wasn't addicted to 4" saddle-bar drops, I'd be riding a Synapse.


----------



## Tommy Walker (Aug 14, 2009)

+1 Cervelo RS, I have one and love it.


----------



## a_avery007 (Jul 1, 2008)

first, as usual buy the one that fits!

Scott usually runs steeper steep tube angles than Cervelo; usually 74 versus 73 in the 54cm range.

the new Scott looks like a very nice ride! 

i owned a CR1 for over 2 years and liked the ride.
i have also have ridden the RS and REALLY liked the ride!!!

the Cervelo will have longer chainstays 41cm versus 40.5cm for the Scott.

Maybe this matters maybe it won't, but the taller the head tube, the more your weight will be shifted back! 
on bikes with a stack more than 16cm, i like 41cm+ chainstays
with lower and more crit style geometry 14cm-16cm stack i like short and snappy, like 40.5 or less chainstay length.


ride both with same tire pressure and saddle, if possible same wheelset, and see how you like them.
they both look great to me..


imlo

good luck and have fun.


----------



## Mtn2RoadConvert (Aug 28, 2006)

I got my RS built with Sram Force back in early February and have logged probably 400 miles. Compared to my Tarmac Pro the geometry is not as aggressive, but is in no way a beach cruiser. Just right in my opinion. I have the 3T Doric (zero set-back) seat post and have the seat as far back as possible, and will probably try changing to get the seat a little further back. The ride is definitely smoother, and I am running the same set of Ksyrium SL's & tires on both. On 50 mile club rides I feel noticeably less fatigued when finished and have noticed it climbs equally as well as the Tarmac. I have not ridden the Scott CR1 so I can't give you a side-by-side comparison.


----------



## laxcheeks (Jan 6, 2006)

Thanks for all the info. Will try to ride both today. Sounds like the changes to the Scott have been well done. Btu at the same time th RS is proven. Guess it all comes down to the road test. I will let you know.


----------



## desmond88 (Feb 19, 2010)

since you only have two options
might as well get a Cervelo
scott rides nicely but yeah the seat kinda hard abit.


----------



## SeattleRider (Jun 17, 2009)

I managed to squeeze in a test ride today. I tried the Cervelo RS. First thing I noticed was the size of that chainstay compared to the CR1. The RS is very chunky in comparison. In fact the person helping me said that the RS has been tested with out the seatstays without no change in performance. At first that sounded great and then I thought, do the seatstays provide any benefit to the comfort of the ride. They are so slender and slight. Whereas the CR1 seems more balanced in both areas and has worked the carbon into nice shapes to provide some shock absorption.

The test ride was really fun. The bike felt more familiar and predictable compared to the CR1. Ride position was bit more comfortable. Ride feel seemed a bit more rough than the CR1 and I maybe a little sluggish. I was surprised since everyone said how plush and quick the RS is. The CR1 seems to smooth out the road, but have I mistaken shock absorbency for the dreaded “wooden” dead feel of bike. 

One poster mentioned that 40.5 or 41 chainstay length may or may not matter but I think it does and so did the shop guy. He said every little millimeter makes a difference and I felt it in the performance of Scott’s shorter chainstay. Turning seemed twitchy and quick on the CR1 and the RS felt, again, predictable.

I really need to test ride the CR1 again before I could really decide. But if I was under pressure and had to choose, I’d go for the RS. If I had some time to think about it and ride the CR1 and wanted to save $600 I might go for the Scott. I love the racy feel of the Scott but appreciate the comfort and casualness of the RS. Still TBD.


----------



## maximum7 (Apr 24, 2008)

Keep in mind the Scott has been redesigned for 2010. They designed it to ride smoother with a more up-right geometry. I rode an '08 and it was quick and snappy, but I thought it to be too stiff and almost harsh.
Haven't ridden the '10 nor the Cervelo. I ended up with a Look 585. 
SeattleRider, 
If you are in Seattle and you can make it to Bothell Ski and Bike, you'll be able to ride all three brands. (Check out the Look 566 as well.)
They are the best. I drive all the way up from Portland to shop from them. 
http://www.bikesale.com/index.aspx

Good luck and keep us posted.


----------



## laxcheeks (Jan 6, 2006)

Got the test ride in yesterday, and I am still up in the air. Both rode very nicely, much smoother then my Trek, less road vibration was the big difference. I agree with Seattlerider that the RS felt a little predictable. I also thought the apperance is also a bit heavy, clunky. With the tire preasures the same, I did not notice much ride difference between them , except I thought the CR1 was a bit more responsive. I felt much more upright on the RS then the CR1(most likely the frame size though). The price difference here is also $600. Nothing to sneeze at. IMO the Scott is much sharper looking ride. I will go and ride again, but leaning to the Scott. My only concern is I measure for a 58 frame and the Scottt I rode was a 56 as the shop does not have a 58 in stock vs a 58 RS. should I be concerned about that. I am still undecided. I guess I can't really go wrong with either, they are both great bikes. Warranty is still a question!


----------



## Gimme Shoulder (Feb 10, 2004)

laxcheeks said:


> Got the test ride in yesterday, and I am still up in the air. ... Warranty is still a question!


I love my RS. Here is a link to the Testrider.com review of the RS. Might help.

http://www.testrider.com/fly.aspx?layout=videoindex&taxid=81&cid=90

The warranty on the Cervelo frame is lifetime to the original owner. And Cervelo takes it very seriously. On mine, after 4000mi, one of the three rivets in the FDR bracket came out, and they warrentied the frame rather than have the shop simply install a new rivet. Reason - they couldn't be sure the rivet hole in the carbon seat tube wasn't somehow already compromised. Coughed up a new frame, and not a dime out of my pocket for shipping or the parts transfer from the old frame to the new.


----------



## a_avery007 (Jul 1, 2008)

ok here is the breakdown for you:

Scott 40.5cm chainstay 20.0cm head tube 73 degree head tube angle 73.3 seat tube angle and an effective top tube length of 57.5cm


Cervelo 41cm chainstay length 20.0cm heat tube 73 head tube angle 73 seat tube angle and an effective top tube length of 58cm with a fork rake of 43

wheelbase should be very close too!!

if one does the math the reach is within 2mm of each other and the stack is most likely the same. effective top tube lengths are within 2mm of each other also..


so, they should fit very similiarly, if you can tell the difference in reach, with same saddle setback and stem than your riding position is very dialed.


ride both over a rough road surfaces, sprint in and out of the saddle, climb some steeps and really think about how bike works as a unit, think balance. 

if you are sensitive to road feel, as i am, then really concentrate on resonance. do you like a softer or firmer feel to the frames transmission of forces and impacts....

choose which one speaks to you all things considered.

hope this helps


----------



## a_avery007 (Jul 1, 2008)

ok a follow up!

go down a size...lol

the 2010 CR1 pro and elite I demo'd really eats up vibration very well, at least as good as the RS and is still very snappy.

rolled over some terrible tarmac and railroad tracks about 15 times and you just blow over the rough stuff without upsetting the chassis.

very good job Scott


----------



## laxcheeks (Jan 6, 2006)

I agree, in fact I ordered my CR1 Pro on Saturday. Should have this weekend. I will post photos and ride report asap.


----------



## SeattleRider (Jun 17, 2009)

nice work laxcheeks! i can't wait to see and hear more. are you going to have the shop assist you with dialing in the fit? what size did you get? 

i did make it up to bothell bike and ski and they are really nice. i rode the scott cr1 pro and the cevelo rs back to back and then back to back again and then once more. i think i prefer the scott and plus the wheels on the scott are twice as nice. although i do not like the handlebars on the scott and would replace those immediately.

i did confirm with scott themselves that the crash replacement price for the cr1 pro is $795.

i went and looked at a new specialized roubaix expert and was surprised at the height of the headtube. it looked very tall, noticeably more so than the other two bikes. i know that is b/c it is higher but, wow. i feel i should at least test ride the roubaix before i totally commit. i'm expecting it to be very plush and upright body position.


----------



## maximum7 (Apr 24, 2008)

I'll be heading to Bothell this Friday with a couple of guys to do some shopping. 

You should have tested the Look 566 while you were there.


----------



## laxcheeks (Jan 6, 2006)

My LBS will do a complete fitting for me on my new 58. I have very wide shoulders so I will be changing the handle bars. The shop will make that swap before assembly. good to hear on the crash replacement price. That is just the frame right! I did not look at the Roubaix as there is not a good specialized dealer in town. I just ordered the garmin Edge 500 to add. Wish it came in black. The head tube on the CR1 is one of the things I like, it is as tall as the RS, but looks alot better.


----------



## SeattleRider (Jun 17, 2009)

Question for laxcheeks and avery007: What type of riding are you wanting to do on your new bike? For me, I'm wanting something that is comfortable and yet still quick in the climbing and descending. I don't race and I like long rides and I'm not really looking to increase speed and lap times. Ultimately, I want to ride in the Seattle to Portland ride again this year and not be as beat up in the end as I was last year on my aluminum bike.

I ask because I'm surprised that Bicycling.com magazine has classified the new Scott as an Enthusiast instead of Plush like the RS. Here is a link to their definitions of all their categories: http://www.bicycling.com/article/0,6610,s1-1-383-18930-1,00.html

I know these are only boxes that they've thrown bikes into and I probably shouldn't be too concerned. But, I'm wondering if you fit more into the Enthusiast or Plush description of what you want out of your new bike. I think I fit more into the Plush but I like the feel of an Enthusiast when I'm on it. I just want to be sure I'm not biting off more than I can handle with too racy of a bike in the Scott after I've been on it for 5,6 or 7 hours.


----------



## a_avery007 (Jul 1, 2008)

566 is a torsional noodle compared to the other 2!!

like i said before the geometry of the two bikes in your size are very similar!!
plush, race, enthusiast, are just labels..

if the bike fits and suits your needs, who cares what one calls it except a great bike for you!
they are 2 great bikes, you win either way.

my riding has everything, long climb, short climbs, very fast descents, rollers, flats- everything.

i don't even get on my bike to ride unless it is for 2+ hours, so i like my bikes to be comfortable, yet snappy. meant for longer style rides, and yes i still like to look around, yet sometimes haul the mail


----------



## laxcheeks (Jan 6, 2006)

I did not ride the Look as I have no access to it. I was looking for a smoth ride, but not give up the agressive feeling. the best way to describe it I found in one of the reviews I read on the CR1. "Think BMW 5 Series" The RS felt more like a 7 Series to me. I don't race but I like to feel like I can go fast when I want to. It is fairly flat here in my part of indiana, but I take at least 1 trip a year to do some climbing. I do have some rolling areas, and of course the flats. Bottom line is I felt that the RS looked, felt and rode as a plush bike and the CR1 looked felt and rode more on the Enthusiast side. I don't think you can go wrong with either the RS or the CR1,the Scott was just better for me. I will be interested to see what HTC Columbia rides at Roubaix.


----------



## a_avery007 (Jul 1, 2008)

*nice summary*

the Cervelo RS was the top ranked bike in Paris Roubaix last year!!!
they had 5 or 6 riders in the top 20 and Thor made the podium. 
remember it is always the engine though:-(

you can bet your a$$ that HTC will be racing the CR1 at Roubaix.

as i stated before these bike will not hold anyone back-ever..lol


----------



## CliveDS (Oct 7, 2009)

Anyone looking at the 566 I did a extensive review on my blog, it's no race bike but is a fantastic all rounder. 

The CR1 is still classic in my mind, the frame has changed over the years but something about it has always been very cool.


----------



## MCF (Oct 12, 2006)

Tires and tire pressure - MAKE SURE both bikes are using the same size tires (23c, 25c) and have the same tire pressure when riding. A bike with 25C tires pumped up to 125psig will ride much rougher than a bike with 23c tires pumped up to 80psig. This can make a BIG difference in the ride of the bike. BTW, I have a 2009 Cervelo RS (black/red) with SRAM RED and Reynolds Assault 46mm carbon wheels and would say it looks anything but boring. 4000+ miles on it and hardly any issues at all other than the occasional click/creak that was due to improper greasing or torquing of a component.


----------



## maximum7 (Apr 24, 2008)

> 566 is a torsional noodle compared to the other 2!!


This statement boggles me as every review says pretty much the opposite. 
Sure it's not for everybody, but I would think you'd have to be capable of some serious power to turn it into a torsional noodle. 



> the Cervelo RS was the top ranked bike in Paris Roubaix last year!!!
> they had 5 or 6 riders in the top 20 and Thor made the podium.


Don't forget the year before, Thor road a Look 585 in that same race.


----------



## a_avery007 (Jul 1, 2008)

*well*

it it purely subjective, but to me, in the twisties, on steep descents or really fast 90 degree turns, a la crit style- it is a noodle!

i currently ride a 09 jamis xenith sl, with 1 1/8 - 1 1/2 steerer and bb30, which is the classic crit bike. stiff stiff stiff. just throw it into a corner, and however much trust you have in your tires, it will go there-NOW.

before that i owned a look 585, so i can gauge a frame..


i did not say it did not ride great, have good road feel, just in comparison to newer, stiffer race frames, that is does not compare well...


ride what you like just ride


----------



## laxcheeks (Jan 6, 2006)

*One sweet Ride*

Took the new CR1 Pro for its first spin tonight. What a great bike. Smooth, responsive its like you are riding air. After the first 25 miles I am a big fan of this bike. This thing carves corners like it is on rails. As Ferris would say "It is so choice. If you have the means, I highly recommend picking one up." Will post photos soon its a hot look IMO. Doing 40 this weekend, we will see if the comfort is there on longer rides.


----------



## SeattleRider (Jun 17, 2009)

laxcheeks, that is so awesome that you love the new ride! let us know how the longer weekend ride goes. i'm very interested to know.

i'm still vacillating after having test ridden a roubaix yesterday. the cr1 and rs are in another category compared to the roubaix expert, imo. i actually really liked the roubaix and the only complaint might be that it is too plush. the other two are much more responsive and "enthusiast" oriented.

when i was in the shop i was telling one salesman how nice and comfortable the ride is and another sales guy turned to me and said, "you just got finished riding a couch of course it was comfortable. you can get used to riding more stretched out and more aggresive stance. don't you want to be a ninja on your bike." and i'm thinking, not really. more like a tai chi zen master on the bike.

i know i can get the handlebars down a bit more by removing spacers on the roubaix. its headtube is a full 25mm taller than the cr1 or rs. that is comfort! but i'm giving up a lot. however, i've never been as relaxed in the drops as i was on the roubaix. i think i'd rather remove height from the handlebars on the roubaix than have to add spacers and increase stem angles on the scott.

still i'm going to give the scott one more shot b/c it is such a great ride. question is, once the ninja phase passes, will i still be comfortable after mile 50 of a 100 mile ride. i know i will be on the roubaix but i'll look ridiculous with the tallest headtube ever imagined. the guy in the shop also said, "thats what specialized does, they've consistently added height to the headtube across all the models year after year."

i've distilled my choices now to the cr1 or roubaix expert and each cost the same $$$. the rs is out as i don't believe the value is there. certainly cache but not a great package.


----------



## a_avery007 (Jul 1, 2008)

how can they be different in the head tube?

in 54cm the difference is 5mm, yes 5mm
in 56 the difference is 10mm or 1cm

they can be set up to look almost the same!
i would argue in the 54cm identical..


----------



## SeattleRider (Jun 17, 2009)

i should have been more specific. yes, you are correct regarding the smaller sizes. i'm looking at the 58 or 61 for my size.

cervelo rs and scott cr1 on the 61 size have 220mm
roubaix is 245mm which is a difference of 25mm. this 25mm difference is the same in the 58.

don't you think i would be better off removing spacers from the roubaix as opposed to adding height to the cr1? 

a_avery, any thoughts on the roubaix expert for 2010?

thanks.


----------



## a_avery007 (Jul 1, 2008)

your reach will be shorter on the Specy for sure, but you can make either the RS or CR1 to fit the same, stack height wise. they will ride differently though, as the Specy runs a 72.5 head angle in the 58cm and the other 2 run 73, not much difference- but some.

it depends on how you like your bikes to handle.
you are talking about 2cm difference in top tube length between sizes and 1cm difference in wheelbase.

which size fits you better?

do you like a snappier ride?

Specy Expert 2010 has a nice spec, except for the wheels, to me..
they are very high quality bikes, but i dont like the zerts and that would put me off.

it is your $ go with what fits, appeals to you, and gives you the ride you like that suits your style...

i much prefer the cervelo rs and cr1 for their ride quality. but if you are riding 25c tires than that is a moot point, ALL bikes feel good with 25c tires pumped to 90psi- even aluminum rigs...lol

imlo


----------



## Thornbye (Mar 29, 2010)

Lazyrider said:


> Cervelo RS for sure. Scotts are not known for comfort.


This used to be true, but actually the new Scott CR 1 Pro is one of the most comfortable bikes (it won a test in German magazine Roadbike in the April 2010 issue). Both the geometry and the built-in shock damping system ensures a comfortable, yet sporty ride.

I would pick the Scott (and will soon buy one!) - IMO it look much better as well. I have seen it at a store, and it looks much better in reality than on the pictures!

Thornbye:thumbsup:


----------



## farva (Jun 24, 2005)

Do the newer CR1's have a replaceable derailleur hanger? My 2006 CR1 SL does not. Love the bike but always a little worried about writing off the frame if I have a crash


----------



## a_avery007 (Jul 1, 2008)

yes it does


----------



## SeattleRider (Jun 17, 2009)

question: am i being too detailed when asking the bike shop guy about trail? is it even something i should be concerned about? since i'm fairly new to road biking and i'm about ready to spend $3K+, i'm very sensitive to everything. 

why does the fork rake on bikes remain the same across the entire size range? some manufacturers do vary the rake in one model and but not another. for example on the tarmac, as the bike frame gets larger, the rake decreases otherwise you would end up with an unstable bike. the rake on a cervelo rs varies from a 49 on smaller bikes to a 43 on the larger. however, the roubaix fork rake remains the same 49 on all sizes and unless you are "average" size you are going to end up with a too much or too little trail. i've read that ideal trail is 5.8 - 6.0.

should trail be a deciding factor? for size 61, the scott i've deduced is 5.6 which seems fine but the size 61 roubaix is 5.3 which i've read can make a bike unstable at high speed. are there enough other compensating factors in the frame for this small trail such as longer chainstays? will this bike be unstable and twitchy in turns or at higher speeds? should i now be considering a new fork with less rake for the roubaix? can i even do that?

thanks.

thanks.


----------



## a_avery007 (Jul 1, 2008)

ride them and tell us!!!

usually 56 for trail is a nice number, 59 if you want really stable.

but, it totally depends on so many factors and your preferences...


just go ride them and buy the one you like- i know, i know so many good flavors of ice cream...


----------



## maximum7 (Apr 24, 2008)

Just go ride one and get the one that fits, handles and rides the best. Forget the numbers. 
Just ride them for as long as the shop will allow. Get at least 20-30 minutes on them.
My frame was $3k and I have no idea what rake or trail is...


----------



## estone2 (Sep 25, 2005)

Holy crap! You're thinking too much.

Ride it. If you like it, buy it. Too twitchy for one person is just right for another, etc.

No expensive bike is going to be sold with crappy geometry from the Specialized, Scott, etc - they're big companies. They do their homework to produce a solid, reliable bike


----------



## SeattleRider (Jun 17, 2009)

so, after all that, i ended up with a 2010 roubaix expert in a size 58. i really thought there was no doubt i'd be a 61. but after the sales guy put the 58 size bike on the trainer and analyzed my riding position and form with his bg computer software and a digital image of me on the bike (and test riding both), it was very clear i needed the 58. i feel so much more confident, in control and on top of the bike in the 58. the 61 felt like a big caddy and the 58 was a sporty compact convertible.

on climbs, the 61 tended to wander to and fro and required a lot of steering input. i'm really pleased with the smaller size and and feels like more a part of me whereas the 61 is like a boat i'm riding on top of and way off the ground. the 58 was a much different handling bike. more like the cervelo cs or scott. both those bikes have an ht height like the 58 expert in their largest sizes. the 61 with 245mm ht is for a taller man than i. 

it has a 100mm bar stem and apparently i have very long femurs and have my seat almost all the way back. the lbs is all about the fit and and spent nearly an hour on fit and setting up the bike for me before i even test rode it. 

also test rode a comp level roubaix and, imho, there is a big difference in ride b/w these two bike. the construction of the expert is similar to s-works with a step up in carbon from the comp as well. the expert could take some harsh bumps and still stay glued to the road. i think this is the vertical compliance everyone talks about. then the comp flexed and bounced all around under me under power whereas the expert could take all my legs could dish out and deliver my swiftly down the road. this must be the stiffness of the bike and I can feel it.

i really believe that specialized has nailed an excellent combination of both comfort and stiffness. for this novice roadie, i am very pleased with this bike. i didn't get to take it home b/c they only had the white in a 58 and i want the blue. on order and will be here soon. btw, the trail on the 58 was excellent. lol.


----------



## maximum7 (Apr 24, 2008)

Well I'm glad you were able to make a decision that you are happy with. CONGRATS!

On the other hand it's a specialized, so I'm disappointed.


----------



## MarvinK (Feb 12, 2002)

I would have tried the CR1 Elite--$500 cheaper for lighter, more ergonomic parts--everything else the same. I think Bothell sells it for around $2500--which puts it way below the Cervelo RS or Specialized Roubaix Expert.


----------



## laxcheeks (Jan 6, 2006)

Last time I checked the Elite had SRAM Rival components and a different color scheme.

SeattleRider,

Congrats on the decision. Hope you enjoy your new ride. Sounds like the right bike for you. 

The Scott has continued to be great. I would reccomend to anyone that is looking for very nice comfort/rce bike you should at least ride the CR1.


----------



## MarvinK (Feb 12, 2002)

Oh ya... in addition to the lighter, more ergonomic SRAM Rival parts--it also has a better looking paint scheme! Good point!


----------



## laxcheeks (Jan 6, 2006)

Your right, the elite scheme probably matches your white bibs better.


----------



## MarvinK (Feb 12, 2002)

...and shoes.


----------



## SeattleRider (Jun 17, 2009)

i know i know. i didn't want to like the specialized. imo, its like buying a trek. but, i figured i should at least try the bike that supposedly started the plush bike craze. i rode the cr1 and rs at bothell 3 times. then i rode the roubaix, i knew it suited by style. still don't get zertz though.

like a_avery once said, "so many flavors of ice cream." we are all so lucky to have such great bikes to choose from.

looking forward to a great season of cycling.

cheers!


----------



## maximum7 (Apr 24, 2008)

You were at Bothell and didn't try out the 566?


----------



## kirksguard (Apr 15, 2010)

*CR1 Pro(s and cons)*

Great post folks... thanks for the feedback. I've just tried the CR1 Pro on a couple of test rides. Very nice handling and on the sportier side of comfort in my opinion. Also has an excellent spec for the price. The kyserium elites alone are $400+ more value than comparable bikes. Unfortunately as I went to order one I find they are sold out for the season in 54cms. Previously looked at the Giant Defy Advanced 1's (sold out) and Bianchi Infinito (also unobtainable). Now looking at the Cervelo RS.


----------



## MarvinK (Feb 12, 2002)

Seriously, try out the CR1 Elite... it's quite a bit cheaper than the Pro and the SRAM parts are lighter and more ergonomic. Everything else is the same.


----------



## CliveDS (Oct 7, 2009)

I have a new bike in this range. Eddy Merckx EMX1 

Been test riding one the last 2 weeks and it's great, a little heavy but super comfortable and smooth.


----------

