# S5 best aero or best compromise?



## Donn12 (Apr 10, 2012)

I did a century ride yesterday and i was really surprised at how many P3/P4 bikes I saw. I guess I assumed that these bikes would ride like crap and no one would use them for a century unless they were training for ironman etc, but I saw quite a few (more than i saw S5s).

So is the S5 a great aero bike that you should get if you want aero and it will be your only bike? If you are gong to have a road bike plus an aero bike would you be better off with a P3 or P5? I thought the riding position was non standard (goofy) but maybe this can be adjusted.
I am going to get an R5 but also toying around with an aero bike to go along with it and I am wondering if I should think about the tri bikes? Even if i did some tri events, 25 miles doesnt seem like it would be any big deal between a S5 and P5. Several riders on slow twitch use S5s but it may be their only bike.


----------



## Nob (Nov 24, 2006)

TT or Tri bike will generally be faster on any course but a hilly climb and a *very* technical decent. If your roads skills are there.

I have all three versions from Cervelo and regularly ride them on a hilly 10 mile TT course and have for the past 5 years now. My TT/Tri bike (P2c) still holds that 10m tt record for me by 1:40. Only thing I can figure is I must have had a good tail wind that day because I haven't gotten back to that run's time with the P2 w/ a set of alloy Mavics on either my SLC-SL or the R3. And I am running Zipps on both of those bikes now. 

On average over the years the R3 with 303s has been the faster bike on that course for me. Likely because of the the steep bit of climbing (2 miles) and fast technical decent. (2 miles).

The TT/ aero rider's position (the biggest advantage of any TT bike) will make a huge difference on a 25 mile TT, compared to a road bike position. If you call a couple of minutes huge, The frame means almost nothing unless you are counting mere seconds. 

I would have thought my SL would beat them both but as much as I like the SL and how well it fits me and how aero I am on it, I still can't consistantly beat the R3 let alone the best time of the P2C on that particular road course. My average HR will also be lower on the R3.

A R3 or R5 with a rider low in the drops and a good aero position with a decent set of wheels seems to be a hard bike to beat almost anywhere from my own experience.

I used the SL in a couple of Tris (more like short crit courses) this summer. The R3 in two (that had big climbs and fast technical decents with almost no flats ) and the P2C in the rest. ( another half dozen).

But ...people ride centuries on their TT/aero bikes as training not because they are easier to ride than a decent road bike. The more miles on a TT bike the better you will ride up and down hills on them while racing. It takes miles.

I used a tt bike as my only bike...and for some that will work. But I live in a hilly area and the shifters and brakes got to be annoying on long rides. It is much easier for me to put in the base miles and hilly miles on a road bike.


----------



## MercRidnMike (Dec 19, 2006)

I've done a variety of long distance stuff (including many non-organized Centuries) on bikes ranging from a full suspension mountain bike, an ss'd old Raleigh Super Gran Prix and a Cx bike...and have to say that Nob is on the money. 

A lot of the riders I see out there are on tt/Tri bikes putting in their base miles on the relatively flat terrain away from the local river valley. I rarely, if ever, see them in town where the climbs out of the valley typically run between 7% and 23%, depending on how direct they are. 

Personally, I am doing the "one bike" road thing with an S2. I do a fair bit of long distance stuff training for a charity ride I do every year...but I also tend to ride solo. I found the S2 is plenty compliant (for me) and quite quick (I don't have a lot of references for road bikes). The S5 might be a better choice for the "one bike" setup.

If you're going two, I'd say your RS is a great long haul bike and a TT/Tri specific bike is the right tool for the "speed, speed and more speed" job.


----------



## Nob (Nov 24, 2006)

One thing not addressed yet in the conversation that I think worth mentioning. The S2 and S3 are lighter than the S5. For an all around bike, being ridden by mere mortals, I am still not convinced the heavier aero bikes are any better when you start adding weight to the frame set. My SCL-SL is lighter than my S3 because of the components I used. The SL is suppose to be stiff and non compliant. It should by all accounts be NASTY on long rides. But it is my choice for double century rides every time. The SL is very close to over all weight of the R3 @ 13# 8oz at just under 14#. Having a lwt aero bike is what most of us really want. I don't think the S5 is the best answer to that question.

I think a R5 built as light as possible (13# seems to be a number easy to obtain) would be a more fun bike on any terrain than the S5 (where much under 15# seems difficutl to obtain) . 

This is a good read:

Weight vs Aero - Cervélo

But what I think some might miss is that we (the no pro public) aren't limited to 15# pro weigh bikes. Riding a well engineered 13# bike is a pure joy. Next time I get the coin rebuilding the S3 into a lwt bike is my goal.

But if i had to do it all over I'd likely just start with a new S2 frame set and look for an over all weight when finished of 14# or under. Or you could rebuilt your RS in a similar lwt manner and have an equally good bike with more ride comfort than the S2 or S5 which would climb better (bike weight & geo added to a better body position) as a bonus.


----------

