# S3 or S5, if you had to choose...



## Rashadabd

As I have mentioned, now that I have my R3 (that I absolutely love), I am gearing up to slowly start my aero bike project and build up a speed bike over time. 

I have been presented some quality opportunities to get a S3 or a S5 frame to build my next project around. There is one 2010 Black S3 and two 2011 S3s (one limited edition green jersey version (black, green, and white) and one Norwegian Red). The S5 is a 2012 Rival model (white, red and black). I typically ride a 51 in Cervelos and I am really comfortable on that size bike. I mention this because the Norwegian red 2011 is a size 54. Now I have test rode a S3 in size 54 and felt fine, but I wonder how it would play out over regular 50+ mile rides. This is all important because the 2011 Norwegian red is by far the best deal and at least $800 cheaper than any of the other frames. 

I have test rode both the S5 and the S3 and REALLY enjoyed both, but it has been a few months and I wanted to get input from those of you that ride both extensively or that have owned or ridden both a great deal. Which do you prefer and why? How signifigant is the weight and stiffness difference? How much more comfortable and lighter is the S3 (I live in hilly and mountainous Oregon). I sincerely appreciate the feedback as it will be a huge help!


----------



## simonaway427

All sizing and paint jobs aside - I prefer the look of the S3 by far. As far as stiffness, comfort, and weight, both an S5 and S3 can be built to similar specs, but the comfort is something only you can determine.

I own an S1, which I love, but my next bike is going to be an R series. Just something about an R series bike that I'm drawn to.


----------



## Rashadabd

I have a R3 and they are great! Very fun to ride IMO. The deal on the S3 might be too good to pass up.


----------



## Nob

You ride a 51 but are going to buy a 54 because it is a good deal and you like the color?

That makes no sense to me. Have you ever had a bike professionaly fit?


----------



## Rashadabd

Nob,

Did you read what I wrote? I test rode the 54 already. I have been fit multiple times (by some very good ones in my opinion). With the S3 Geometry there isn't big difference between the 51 and 54 and I felt fine on my test ride. My ONLY concern is how the size difference might play out on 50+ mile rides. I didn't say anything about liking the color over the other bikes either.


----------



## AvantDale

If your concerned about weight...go with the S3. Comfort is for your body to determine. For me...I don't really like soft riding frames.

Performance-wise...both will be similar. Numbers...the S5 is more aero...to the recreational rider...its negligible. 

I worked for a shop that sells quite a few Cervelos...I've tried just about all of them. Except for the P5.


----------



## Nob

Rashadabd,



> I have been fit multiple times (by some very good ones in my opinion).


And you ride a 51 Cervelo. Let's assume that is because a 51 was the frame size that fit you, after being fit "multiple times".

As I said buying a 54 Cervelo makes no sense to me. Unless of course you bought a 51 R3 because of color and price. Nothing wrong with doing either. I do both but also know what size frame I should be riding. You asked for feed back. Seems to me the first question that needs a definative answer is bike size here not the bike model. You asked, so just giving an opinion. You can generally make any number of frame sizes work. But one size will normally fit better than the others. Which in turn will make the bike much more enjoyable to ride. Seems prudent on an expensive frame to know the size you require.

Obviously that may be of little concern.



> This is all important because the (54) 2011 Norwegian red is by far the best deal and at least $800 cheaper than any of the other frames.


Color, aero and bike model? I have a S3 and have ridden a S5. I really liked the Norwegian red (my apologies for assuming the same of you) and when I found the S3 would be discontinued I started looking. I bought simply for the cosmetics..red bike that still looked like a road bike. The S5 doesn't to me. My tri bikes look like well...Tri bikes. Even though the S5 is a * better* aero bike. Bought a SLC-SL partially for the same reason...love the black and white Cervelos. And which may make no sense to another bike buyer. I already knew I was getting a stellar bike, for my use.

But they are all in a 56 simply because they fit :idea:


----------



## Rashadabd

Thanks Avant, right now I am leaning a little toward the S3, I think I kind of like the black and green limited over the Norwegian at this point, but I might go down and test the S5 again this weekend just to cement a decision in my mind.

Nob,

I agree for the most part. Like you said, many of us can fit comfortably on more than one size bike because we are tweeners and good fitters can dial it in well on a couple of sizes for you. For me on a S3, the differences were pretty negligible. You are talking about a 53 cm top tube vs. a 54.5 or something like that (the 51 S3 doesn't acutally have a 51 or 52 cm top tube like some bikes), so it really isn't that big of a deal. The standover was the one area where I could tell the difference. 

Thanks for your comments.


----------



## AvantDale

I wouldn't look at the top tube length. Look at the reach. 

I ride a 52cm Cannondale...but when I went to the Cervelo...I moved to a 54. Even though the S2 has a longer top tube...the reach was almost identical to the 52 Cannondale. I use the same 110mm stem on both bikes.


----------



## Rashadabd

Thanks, I did and it's just as close 370mm for the 51 and 380mm for the 54, so we're still talking 1 cm.


----------



## Rashadabd

It's actually kind of weird. I've never seen a bike manufacturer put two sizes so close together. I know a Felt's F Series a 51 and a 54 feel like two different bikes for me, but on the S3, they are very close.


----------



## AvantDale

If you were properly fit on a bike...that would mean a 1cm shorter stem. Bike will handle a bit different to the longer wheelbase.


----------



## Nob

.......TT, HT, FC, SOH, Stack, Reach
51 .530 120 558 729 .. 522.. 370
54 .545 140 573 746 .. 541.. 380
56 .565 160 593 764 .. 560.. 394
58 .580 180 608 781 ...580.. 403


----------



## Rashadabd

Thanks for the input.


----------



## hefeweizan

S5 for me if I had to choose...


----------



## xjbaylor

I would go with the S3 if given the option. It is almost as slippery, and regardless of what Cervelo claims, it rides better. It is still a very stiff bike, but the thin seatstays do help with the ride. 

Buy the black and green bike, so I can live vicariously through you. Alternatively, buy my Olympic edition and _I_ will buy the black and green.


----------



## Tupelo

I just got an S5 and love it. After I changed out the wheels to the brand new Enve Smart 3.4 clinchers with Schwalbe Ultremo ZX, it is a very compliant ride. I find it even more comfy than my Spesh Roubaix with my heavy training wheels. By the way, the S5 is fast:blush2:. I love riding that bike.


----------



## xjbaylor

Tupelo said:


> I just got an S5... I find it even more comfy than my Spesh Roubaix with my heavy training wheels....


What tires were you running on the Spec? Gatorskins? Having ridden both bikes, I am a little surprised that you found the S5 that comfortable. Not that it rides terribly, but the Roubaix is kind of the gold standard for a smooth ride on a frame that is still somewhat responsive.


----------



## OrenPerets

AvantDale said:


> If you were properly fit on a bike...that would mean a 1cm shorter stem. Bike will handle a bit different to the longer wheelbase.



+1.

assuming you're not using a short stem (i am assuming 110 mm and more), than you'll be using a 1Cm shoter stem (i.e. 100, with the 110 as the one used currently o the 51' cervelo).

also, head tube is taller... 20 mm so.
on the 51cm cervelo, are you using spacers under your stem? to what total stack? what angle stem are you using?


Oren


----------



## config

I prefer the more traditional look of the S3. The S5 looks more like a time-trials (tri-athlete) bike. Of course Cervelo has to push the current model of being better, faster, etc. It would be foolish of them to say the older model has the advantage (even if it truly did).


----------



## Tupelo

xjbaylor said:


> What tires were you running on the Spec? Gatorskins? Having ridden both bikes, I am a little surprised that you found the S5 that comfortable. Not that it rides terribly, but the Roubaix is kind of the gold standard for a smooth ride on a frame that is still somewhat responsive.


No, I have the Roubaix Specialized tires. It's the wheels that I have now on the bike. A 28 hole H plus sons which are nice wheels but ride harsh. The stock Fulcrums are a definitely more forgiving. I'm in agreement with you, the Roubaix is a very comfortable bike, and depending on the wheels and tires you choose can change those characteristics. The S5 is not that harsh when paired with a nice set of wheels


----------



## RoadrunnerLXXI

Looks like David Miller of Team Sharp/Garmin won stage 12 with a Cervelo S3, not a R3. Must have preferred aero over weight.


----------



## Rashadabd

Yeah, D.Millar is one of the guys (along with Zabriski and a couple of others on the team) that pretty much exclusively rides the S Series. T.Danielson, D.Martin and some others are the exact opposite, they almost exclusively ride the R Series (R5ca and R5 VWD) whenever they can.


----------



## JimF22003

nice spoiler....


----------



## RoadrunnerLXXI

Just out of curiosity, I just went on the Cervelo website to see what's the difference between the 2011 S2 and S3. Besides the obvious component group change, there aren't much. The fork is Funda Team instead of Pro, headset is FSA Orbit IS Carbon instead of IS 3, handlebar and stem is 3T Team instead of Pro. That's a steep price jump if you are just looking at the S2 frame($2000) vs the S3($4500) For the amount of weight saved, it's doesn't make economical sense if you do the calculation on gram per dollar for both IMO.


----------



## xjbaylor

RoadrunnerLXXI said:


> That's a steep price jump if you are just looking at the S2 frame($2000) vs the S3($4500) For the amount of weight saved, it's doesn't make economical sense if you do the calculation on gram per dollar for both IMO.


In the bicycle world, and the real world for that matter, it costs money to own "the best." In this case, the S3 was the top of the line aero bike for Cervelo in 2011. There are differences in the frame (mostly the seat stays) that make for an appreciable improvement, but in the end top of the line bikes cost more. They can charge those prices because there are people that will line up to buy them when they come out, and selling high dollar bikes adds to the prestige of the brand.

Take the R5ca for example. It is a marginal improvement over the R5, which is a marginal improvement over the R3, but the price would imply that it is 3x better than the R3. In reality, it is the best, and therefore it is priced that way. Is it worth the money? Not to most people. Will they sell enough to make it worth it? Yep. Same with Red vs. Rival, 3T Team vs. 3T Ltd. etc.


----------



## bayAreaDude

RoadrunnerLXXI said:


> Looks like David Miller of Team Sharp/Garmin won stage 12 with a Cervelo S3, not a R3. Must have preferred aero over weight.


Thanks a lot man.


----------



## Tupelo

RoadrunnerLXXI said:


> Looks like David Miller of Team Sharp/Garmin won stage 12 with a Cervelo S3, not a R3. Must have preferred aero over weight.


Actually he was on an S5, not a 3.


----------



## malanb

Rashadabd said:


> Nob,
> 
> Did you read what I wrote? I test rode the 54 already. I have been fit multiple times (by some very good ones in my opinion). With the S3 Geometry there isn't big difference between the 51 and 54 and I felt fine on my test ride. My ONLY concern is how the size difference might play out on 50+ mile rides. I didn't say anything about liking the color over the other bikes either.


Oooh sure no bug difference between a 51 and a 54. Go ahead waste your money:thumbsup: sure it is going to look nice with a short stem and less seat post


----------



## Rashadabd

Yeah, Millar is one of the guys (along with Zabriskie and a couple of others) that almost exclusively ride the S5. You have the exact opposite with T. Danielson and Dan Martin, etc. They are almost always on a R5ca or R5 VWD. Ryder is starting to ride more and more on his R5ca as well. It's just a preference thing. Sprinters and time trialists tend to prefer the S5, climbers and all arounders tend to go the other way and look to R5. Your rarely see anyone bring the S5 to the spring classics like Paris Roubaix either because of the cobbles, etc.


----------



## Rashadabd

Tour Bikes:

Photos: Garmin-Sharp


----------



## Rashadabd

xjbaylor said:


> In the bicycle world, and the real world for that matter, it costs money to own "the best." In this case, the S3 was the top of the line aero bike for Cervelo in 2011. There are differences in the frame (mostly the seat stays) that make for an appreciable improvement, but in the end top of the line bikes cost more. They can charge those prices because there are people that will line up to buy them when they come out, and selling high dollar bikes adds to the prestige of the brand.
> 
> Take the R5ca for example. It is a marginal improvement over the R5, which is a marginal improvement over the R3, but the price would imply that it is 3x better than the R3. In reality, it is the best, and therefore it is priced that way. Is it worth the money? Not to most people. Will they sell enough to make it worth it? Yep. Same with Red vs. Rival, 3T Team vs. 3T Ltd. etc.


I couldn't agree more, which is why I went with the base R3 over the R5 or S Series bikes. I competed in a 75 mile hilly gran fondo yesterday and this bike is a great value for the way it performs. Top shelf performance at a price that fit my budget. I saw a couple of aero bikes out there and they really weren't pulling away from anyone in my opinion. If anything at this point, I would only really spend a little more money for added comfort or better climbing assistance (significant weight reduction). This bike checks all the boxes and to improve on what it offers in any of those departments would cost way too much and/or probably sacrifice something else (stiffness, etc.). In the end, my advice to myself and others is to test a bunch of different bikes, just get the bike you want and that best suits your riding interests and then avoid getting sucked into all the "trends" and sales tactics. I am happy to say that, all things considered, the best bike for me is the R3 I already have.


----------



## Defy

Since the pros have moved on to the S5, the decision seems like a easy one.


----------



## xjbaylor

Defy said:


> Since the pros have moved on to the S5, the decision seems like a easy one.


The pros ride what their sponsers ask them to ride, as in their current production bikes. They can choose the R5 or the S5, but Cervelo wouldn't appreciate their teams riding a bike for which an "improvement" had already been released.


----------



## Rashadabd

Absolutely correct and my understanding is that some of the guys on the team were pretty unhappy to give up their S3s when they had to. I have decided to stick with my R3 for now and see what 2013 has to offer.


----------



## gibson00

I had to make the same decision, and I went with an S3.
It just looks so much nicer than the S5, IMHO, lighter too. The only thing that I like more about the S5 is that is is better set up to accept electronic wiring, if that matters to you.

And, not to sound like a broken record, but between a 51 and a 54, one should be a better fit for you than the other. Of course you can make either work. I ride a 54, and I could make a 51 work if i wanted to use several spacers under my stem and a 130-140mm stem. I could also use a 56 with no spacers and a 100mm stem.
The point is, one should be better than the other, providing you with the best handling characteristics for your size stem, etc.
My honest opinion is figure out which size is proper, sets you up with a correct size stem (110 - 120 IMHO), with no more than 2-3cm of spacers under the stem (including the headset top cap), and with your saddle in a generally centered location on the rails.

Again, I get that you can -make- either work, but IMHO don't drop that kind of money unless the size fits you perfect.

Whoops, just noticed what you said about waiting for 2013....OK. Same advice for sizing though!
Cheers


----------



## chiefDave

This week, I test rode base S5, Team S5 U Di2 and the S5 VWD. I had bought some enve 45 CCs for my 2011 R3 (SRAM Red, Rotor 3D+ 175, Q rings, fizik curve snake, ergonova team bars, speedplays, DA c24s ect...).

The base was very porky and the shifting on the ultegra was a bit boring IMO. The VWD Red rode fantastic, stiff and settled. I test rode them on my enve 45s as we all know what the OEM fulcrum racing 7s are like. The VWD was light too at 15.9 I think, and the paint and color scheme was just gorgeous. We did flip the stem to get the position close to my R3, and it did feel very natural to me as the cockpit was the same as my R3.

Bu,. I test rode an S-works Venge and bought it instead of the S5. I am not a fan of the matte black, and I am not digging any of the S saddles and we are trying to get the clamp for a fizik curve, but overall I am very happy. I just wish I could have bought the S5 VWD Red and the venge as the S5 was pure art to see. Great bikes!
Dave


----------



## bayAreaDude

chiefDave said:


> This week, I test rode base S5, Team S5 U Di2 and the S5 VWD. I had bought some enve 45 CCs for my 2011 R3 (SRAM Red, Rotor 3D+ 175, Q rings, fizik curve snake, ergonova team bars, speedplays, DA c24s ect...).
> 
> The base was very porky and the shifting on the ultegra was a bit boring IMO. The VWD Red rode fantastic, stiff and settled. I test rode them on my enve 45s as we all know what the OEM fulcrum racing 7s are like. The VWD was light too at 15.9 I think, and the paint and color scheme was just gorgeous. We did flip the stem to get the position close to my R3, and it did feel very natural to me as the cockpit was the same as my R3.
> 
> Bu,. I test rode an S-works Venge and bought it instead of the S5. I am not a fan of the matte black, and I am not digging any of the S saddles and we are trying to get the clamp for a fizik curve, but overall I am very happy. I just wish I could have bought the S5 VWD Red and the venge as the S5 was pure art to see. Great bikes!
> Dave


Curious what you mean by 'boring' ultegra shifting. Is that a good or bad thing? For me, ideal shifting would be that it works so easily/well that I don't notice it, which is guess is boring - I certainly don't expect any exciting unexpected things to happen while shifting.


----------



## chiefDave

bayAreaDude said:


> Curious what you mean by 'boring' ultegra shifting. Is that a good or bad thing? For me, ideal shifting would be that it works so easily/well that I don't notice it, which is guess is boring - I certainly don't expect any exciting unexpected things to happen while shifting.


Better words would have been precise, predicable and effortless and very quiet esp compared to my R3 with SRAM Red. I went to the LBS thinking I would buy the S5 Team with Ui2 as it is very cool and slick, but it did not inspire me as much as I thought it would. That and the hoods where a bit small for my hands and I imagined riding in the winter with full finger gloves would give me issues.

Made me think of cars too and my C5 Z06 with an m12 is more fun for me then my bud with a C6 and an A6. The auto is quicker and well auto but for me, the M12 just rocks. Sorry for the confusion.
Dave


----------



## warthog11

I went for an S5. I don't mind the looks but don't love them either. In the end they aren't that important to me. The S5 is stiffer and faster that was the selling point that sold me. It is a race bike not a painting.


----------

