# 585 Ultra or Cervelo R3



## varian72 (Jul 18, 2006)

Anyone ridden both and decided on the 585 Ultra over the R3? Why?

Outside of fit did you find one stiffer? harsher? better at climbing? Decending?

I live in VT so soaking up the road cracks is a big question for me.

Thanks.


----------



## C-40 (Feb 4, 2004)

*size???*



varian72 said:


> Anyone ridden both and decided on the 585 Ultra over the R3? Why?
> 
> Outside of fit did you find one stiffer? harsher? better at climbing? Decending?
> 
> ...


Frame size and rider weight can make a big difference in your perceptions. The oddballs in the R3 are the 49 and 51cm sizes. They have very short front-centers, overly quick steering and the ride is quite stiff. The rest have fairly standard geometry. I owned a 51cm R3 and sold it have four 50 miles rides -just didn't like it. I then got the standard 585 in a 51cm size (S) and I've been on it since the spring of 2006. It's been really great.

All that said, I just built up a 585 Ultra and will ride it for the first time tomorrow. I'll be doing my regular 50 mile route that has a 10 mile mountain climb. I'll add my impressions then.


----------



## varian72 (Jul 18, 2006)

I would be a size 51 in the R3.

Are you a size small in the Look? Look forward to your Ultra impressions. Some good 07 deals out there.


----------



## C-40 (Feb 4, 2004)

*yes..*



varian72 said:


> I would be a size 51 in the R3.
> 
> Are you a size small in the Look? Look forward to your Ultra impressions. Some good 07 deals out there.


I ride a size S. I really can't recommend the 51cm R3. 

I just got my 585 Ultra from Excel Sports. I've been looking at the closeout models for months and finally decided to give it a try. Note that the finish is UD or unidirectional. It's got a nice high gloss clearcoat, but there is none of the traditional weave pattern in the carbon. In that respect the finish is a lot like a clearcoated R3.

I can tell you that the 585 is a great climber and descender. As long as the stiffer Ultra doesn't ride too harsh, I'll be happy.  I only weigh 135 and sometimes less, so an overly stiff frame is not what I need.


----------



## acid_rider (Nov 23, 2004)

*also try Cervelo RS*



varian72 said:


> I would be a size 51 in the R3.
> 
> Are you a size small in the Look? Look forward to your Ultra impressions. Some good 07 deals out there.


Something else to consider: (keeping in mind what C-40 said).

Cervelo RS is very close to R3 geometry (same STA and HTA and main tube lengths) but with 10mm longer rear chain stays and a 20mm taller headtube. So in a 51cm size the RS might offer a better geometry that 51cm R3 would.


----------



## cpark (Oct 13, 2004)

C-40 brought up a great point.
I wanted to get a Look 585 last year but felt like I was between M and L but it was very nice riding bike. I test rode it against SLC-SL and Time VXR Proteam.
I ended up going with M Time that has 56cm top tube....
I imagine they would feel very similar if you put exact same components.
I don't think you can go wrong with either one of them.

Have fun!


----------



## C-40 (Feb 4, 2004)

*differences...*



acid_rider said:


> Something else to consider: (keeping in mind what C-40 said).
> 
> Cervelo RS is very close to R3 geometry (same STA and HTA and main tube lengths) but with 10mm longer rear chain stays and a 20mm taller headtube. So in a 51cm size the RS might offer a better geometry that 51cm R3 would.


In the 51cm size, the HTA is much different on the RS, at only 71 degrees, instead of 73 and an oddball 53mm rake is used to reduce the trail to 60mm. The Cervelo should require one size longer stem than the LOOK.

http://www.cervelo.com/bikes.aspx?bike=RS2008#G


----------



## C-40 (Feb 4, 2004)

*first impressions...*

I got on the road at 7 this morning and rode about 55 miles, including about 15 miles of climbing and plenty of high speed descents. I do believe the BB bracket is stiffer than the 585 origin and the ride is probably a tad harsher, but it's not objectionable at all. I don't have any of those nasty gravel sealed roads to ride on, but I went over plenty of asphalt separation cracks and other areas of rough pavement. The Ultra is a keeper. Good thing since I cut the steering tube down to use only a 5mm spacer under the stem.


----------



## varian72 (Jul 18, 2006)

What's your build? Just curious. Have you ever ridden a Tarmac? My current ride and was just wondering if you had a comparison in terms of BB stiffness and ride quality. Tarmac is nice, but it feels dead to me at times. Lacking a spring when I want to sprint on a climb.


----------



## nrspeed (Jan 28, 2005)

The 585 ultra is an amazing bike for the price. The best performance vs value out there IMO. It is stiff and light. Excellent workmanship and quality. I would highly recommend the 585 ultra.


----------



## scslite (Nov 11, 2006)

*585 Ultra is great!*

Nice to see your impression C-40. I too have a 51 Ultra. Although I can't compare to an Origin I am very satisfied with the Ultra. At first I was afraid that the size, being a small, may turn out to be an overly stiff frame..., especially since it was built for powerful riders or sprinters which I am not.....Yet.  Anyway, was glad to confirm that the ride is not harsh at all but the bike just does everything so well! Climbing and descending is very confidence inspiring. The bike just begs to be ridden. Love it!


----------

