Originally Posted by
Duffeymt
I am in need of a new road bike - got both my road and tri bike stolen out of a storage unit last week. While waiting for my insurance to come through, I am currently researching how to best replace my road bike. I was riding a 2009 Masi 3VC.
95% of my riding is weekend group rides and I am hoping to adding in fast group rides. No racing in my immediate future, although I would like to progress in that direction. With that said, I would prioritize comfort over speed, but as most people, don't want to sacrifice too much speed. Ideally a nice blend of some comfort and some speed versus mostly comfort or mostly speed.
My current shop carries both Cervelo and Scott, but I am not dead set on just these two, but this is where I am starting my research. Right now its between the R3 and the CR1. I can get the 2012 R3 Rival and the 2013 R3 105 both for $2600. The CR1 Ultegra is $3500 and the the CR1 105 is $2400.
I'll ride both the CR1 and R3, but was wondering...
1. Is the 2012 R3 Rival a better buy than the 2013 R3 105 at the same price?
2. Is the CR1 Ultegra worth the $1100 difference over the CR1 105 and the R3 105?
3. Is the 105 a better buy and the price difference applied to a better wheelset?
Thanks for your input as I try to narrow down my decisions.
Maybe I'm crazy, but there must be some huge difference in either wheelsets or frame construction between the CR1 with 105 and the CR1 with Ultegra. A quick ebay search for complete new groupsets shows that the 6700 Ultegra is only about $200-300 more than a complete 5700 105 group. Even the Ui2 electronic Ultegra group should only be $600 or so more than the 105 group if you're buying just the equipment.
Anyway, forgetting that huge price gap, I'd say get the 105, and I'd also say at least test ride a more comfort oriented frame like the Cervelo RS, Specialized Roubaix, Trek Domane, or whatever Scott's equivalent may be in that category. It's a misconception that you are "sacrificing" speed by getting a bike of this sort. If anything, for a majority of road riders you're gaining speed because you aren't as beat up during rides and can train for longer. There's nothing inherently slow about a comfort oriented bike (they're mostly developed as race bikes for pro teams competing in races over rough roads), they're usually just as light as something like a CR1, they have the same or similar groupsets, ect. The difference is usually a "relaxed" geometry that allows you to sit more comfortably and most companies also include some sort of proprietary shock absording gizmo (zertz inserts and special seatpost in the roubaix, iso-coupler in the trek, shaped seatstays on the cervelo). People consider them "slower" because they can put you in a slightly less aero position depending on how you set the bike up and they are not as twitchy and stiff for racing, but those differences are honestly only needed at the absolute margin, meaning you won't notice unless you're already a competitive racer and losing to guys on aero race bikes by a matter of a few seconds or tenths after hours of racing. If you are just getting in to group rides, you're a long way from needing the advantages a "race" frame offers, so I'd at least consider something with a little more comfort.
Remember, you don't buy speed, you only get it by training. 105 vs Ultegra is also a silly debate to be having as a non-racer. There's nothing "faster" about Ultegra, it's just a little lighter and slightly more durable (debatable). If you have the extra money and don't have anything else to spend it on, go for it.