Garfield Cat

Here's the bike count (from Slowtwitch) at Kona 2006:

1 CERVELO 263
2 TREK 128
3 QUINTANAROO 122
4 KESTREL 84
5 KUOTA 76
6 CANNONDALE 75
7 LITESPEED 70
8 SCOTT 66
9 SPECIALIZED 59
10 GIANT 58
11 FELT 40
12 GURU 38
13 LOOK 38
14 ORBEA 35
15 SOFTRIDE 23

That adds up to 1,175 so there's the other mfgs that didn't make this list.

sidepocket

I'm surprised to see Giant so far down on the list considering they're such a huge company.

trimonkey

How much of it is name when it comes to a bike, and how much is actual quality of build? I know that Desiree Ficker (2nd place woman pro) rides a Guru (given to her as part of her sponsorship i think), yet they are way down the list. Are they just a small company, or do you have to pay through the teeth for a decent frame? Just wondering why cervelo are so far ahead of everyone else.

Sprocket Man

Cervelos are far ahead because they make very good products that can sell for very reasonable prices. The P3C and some of the other top shelf products from Cervelo are quite pricey, but they also offer some very good frames for reasonable prices. Also, Cervelo sponsors Team CSC, and CSC has been pretty successful on the pro cycling circuit.

I don't think that one needs to pay a lot to get a decent frame. I've seen enough really fast competitors riding old, supposedly cheap or antiquated frames to realize that equipment matters a lot less than many people imagine.

Glenfiddich_Man

jennings780

I wonder how much is name. How can some of these small companies possibly have the budgets to have competitive frames vs. companies like Specialized, Trek and Cannondale. Those three companies pour so much $$$ into R&D. Cannondale especially. How can a GURU or Kuota or the like possibly compete let alone be viewed as a superior bike to the Trek Equinox TTX or the Cannondale Six13 Slice Aero? How much of it is bling?

dogpound

man, I've never even heard of kuota.
I think the small co have competitive frames because they go custom (such as elite)

rplong

I think most of the time you are paying for the name of those 'big 3'. The damn bike is not going to make you go faster. You aren't going to save anything significant off of your time from the frame alone. 5 minutes? 10? 30? When the race takes the pros 8+ and normal AG's 10+, 30 minutes is nothing for AG's. The fact that Stadler rides a Kuota does not mean it is a phenomenal bike. He could make any folded over piece of carbon go faster than anyone else that day. People should focus on quality and reliability.

These smaller companies don't produce as many bikes, but the majority of their products are tri bikes. They can still be competitive because they are making more money off of their high-end bikes. While those big 3 offer crappy clunker mountain bikes (like the one sitting in my garage) instead of ONLY premium high end bikes that the small companies offer.

I think triathletes want something different, more tri-specific in the first place. Another reason the smaller companies do well.

trimonkey

The reason i ask, is that i have heard loads of people singing the praises of Cervelo, and was curious why. (thinking about my next bike already if you can't tell) Obviously they manufacture quality bikes, but i wonder why so many people choose them over other makes? Is it simply the result of a good reputation coupled with good marketing that results in them being first choice for a lot of triathletes? Or is there something in their design or build that makes them superior to other makes?

Having never rode one, i can't comment on them. But i just wonder if you blindfolded someone, put them on a bike by a different manufacturer within the same price range, and asked them which one they prefer, what they would say? Or would the differences be too small to quantify?

Before Cervelo lovers crucify me, i haven't got anything against them at all, i'm only using them as an example because they're top of the list.

rplong

I am a Cervelo, Trek, Specialized owner. I bought my P2 this summer after weighing in other bike brands in the same price range. I was pretty much open to anything I could find here in Omaha that I could try out in my size. I had always leaned towards Cervelo, mainly because almost half of their product mix is triathlon specific (or TT) bikes. This tells me they have put some energy into these products, not just slapped some tri bars on their road bikes. I also chose Cervelo over the other brands because of past experience and I was willing to try something different. Honestly, if you put me on another brand in the same price range, I doubt I would be able to tell. But I like the feeling of having a quality product that won't have the same problems as I have had in the past.

jennings780

Will brand X tri bike really make you faster than brand Y? Maybe, maybe not. Most likely, any difference in time will be minimal. But there are other factors that go into buying a bike. ? I think there is a lot of intangible that is important. Does the bike fit you right? Do you like how it feels? Are the shifts crisp? Is the sound of the wheels and frame pleasing? Does it handle how you like (is it too twitchy or not responsive enough, or just right)? Do you like how it looks? Does the brand have some bling value? Is the bike comfortable? Is it stiff? Can you feel lateral flex? There is a lot that adds to the riding experience other than just your bike split or average speed.

Consider why someone would spend the money to buy a 5 series BMW over a Honda Accord or VW Passat. On paper the would seem like similar cars. The driving experience is difference. There are little things that BMW does that the other cars don't. The feel of the cars is different. And then looking at the same price range, some prefer the feel of a mercedes to a BMW or vice versa. You can't really say that an E500 Mercedes is nicer than a BMW 550i, but some percentage of the people in the market for such a car will prefer the drive and feel of one to the other. Is the same true with bikes?

rplong

Yes.

^*^BATMAN^*^

Bikes do make a HUGE difference. Why is cervelo that far up(more then double second place)....is it the fact that there is thousands of hours of R&D put into building some of the lightest, strongest, most aero frame out there. Marketing? I never really saw too much until the tour this year, and then not even much after that. It is all word of mouth that I have experianced.

I love guru for mostly one reason......$200 ontop of any of their bikes, they will custom make it for you. So you go to a dealer, they measure you, and when its done, custom frame. Plus, they make some nice bikes.

Jennings, alot of things you mentioned about the bike, is not frame specific. We are talking about frames, unless Trek, Cervelo, Scott, ect is making componetry now. Fit, strength, stiffness, aerodynamics, weight, those are things you need to look at.

I think Cervelo is a very forward thinking company, alot to do with the owners being engineers themselves. I will admit though, I think they owe ALOT to Dave Z. for that world record prologue beating out LA. Also though, there has been some very high profile wins on Cervelos....Lisa Bently is one we should all know(and a local to me). Though what is to say that in 2 years say Orbea(first name came to my head) will start making frames that get huge profile wins(Kona, Pro cycling circuts), and then they are the next big thing.

jennings780

True. Part of the bike experience is the components. The most important part of the bike is the frame - agreed. Then wheels, and on down the line.

But, part of my point is how can Guru or Kuota possibly make as a good a frame as Cannondale? Look at the $$$ Cannondale spends on R&D. Look at the cutting edge designs that are produced each year. Same with Trek - so much $$$ on R&D. Cervelo is big enough that I think they qualify as well as a company that spends a lot on R&D and comes out with cutting edge products. I am seriously wondering what sets apart these smaller bike companies that would make a top notch triathlete say "wow, I really think that Kuota or Guru (or whatever) frame is superior to the Cannondale or Trek." How much of it is wanting to have a bike with more bling and not wanting to have a bike from one of the big manufacturers?

rplong

Because maybe the differences in the frame are so miniscule that someone does not want to pay for a big name, but still get similar value and advantages. Lance Armstrong could have won the Tours on a Huffy. I don't think the bike matters as much as some think on this board. You can tell me X minutes over a 40K time trial, etc. etc... for wheels, frame, helmet, blah blah. I will agree, the truth IS in the numbers. However, the engine is the most important part. Stadler could have ridden anything that day and still have been as dominant.