Cervelo s3 vs r3

shaneobrien95

Iv been looking at the cervelo and wondering does anybody ride one and what kinda review would you give it.

I'm torn between the s3 or r3
Both ultegra di2

sullzz

shaneobrien95 wrote: »

Iv been looking at the cervelo and wondering does anybody ride one and what kinda review would you give it.

I'm torn between the s3 or r3
Both ultegra di2

I just got an r3 (2013) model 2 days ago, so far I love it although I haven't been on any major spins just yet, it seems to be a great climber and unbelievable for descending on I'm doing a local supportive in the morn so I'll see how it is over a decent distance, before I got this I had a loan of an s2 to do a charity run to Galway and back as my other bike had sold and the r3 hadn't arrived , i found that to have great power but I was left uncomfortable after the distance , I suppose the s3 might be the same.

Lusk_Doyle

I have an R3 SL and it is an awesome bike! So responsive, stiff, and just a real pleasure to ride. I have Campag chorus on it.

dermabrasion

I have ridden Cervelo's for a good while now and love 'em. One criterion you could use to decide is what do you want to do with it? For racing, or Tri's an S3 would be ideal. Long hilly days in the saddle on Irish roads would suit an R3.
That said, looking at Garmin this classics season, each rider seems to choose their own model. Dan Martin was on an R5 (at the Flèche), Farrar on an S5, Slagter on an S3, and Vansummaran (I think) on an R3. Different strokes.

Morrisseeee

S > for speed
R > for comfort

bbolger

shaneobrien95 wrote: »

Iv been looking at the cervelo and wondering does anybody ride one and what kinda review would you give it.

I'm torn between the s3 or r3
Both ultegra di2

Did you pick one in the end?

If I was going out to buy a bike tomorrow (sadly not) it'd be between the same two.
Related to what Morrisseeee said, are your goals based on speed/comfort/races/sportives?

karlmyson

I bought the 2013 R3 a couple of months ago and I've done over 2,000km on it. I previously rode a Canyon Ultimate CF SLX. Both incredible bikes. I can say the R3 is faster than the Canyon in a straight line - the Canyon is faster on a technical descent, with better responsiveness. Both bikes are fast and comfortabtle. The R3 is a shade heavier and componentry is 105 rather than Dura-Ace. I share the same set of C35 wheels between the bikes. A bike of that quality needs better than stock wheels to get the best out of it.
One real-world comfort comparison - I rode the Canyon in Roubaix in 2012 and it was fine, but I was sore afterwards for a week. The R3 on the same cobbles in April this year performed faster and there were no recovery issues after the ride was over. Both rides covered over 30km on the pavé.
I haven't ridden the Canyon since I bought the R3. Overall, I'd rate the R3 higher than the Canyon.
I've done a couple of 200km+ rides on the R3 in the last month, so I've got to know it well now, and planning a 400k+ to Belfast next Thurs, so that'll be intereresting. I'm very happy with it.

karlmyson

One other input I'd make - one of my clubmates also bought the 2013 R3. He has an S2 also. He said he notices no difference between them. Having said that, he doesn't do ultra long rides.

Lusk_Doyle

Morrisseeee wrote: »

S > for speed
R > for comfort

R3 SL is a fast bike. Maybe it's just me?!?