Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 55
  1. #1
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    13

    Cervelo R2.5 - Is it really THAT bad?

    I've read a couple of reviews of Cervelo's R2.5 carbon bike that have said the bottom bracket becomes unbonded or that the seatpost slips. Obviously, the first problem would be more of an issue. What can anyone tell me about their experience with the R2.5 - aside from those reviews posted.

    Thanks!
    "Good enough never is."

  2. #2
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    14
    I've read the same reviews, and I see there's a new one from a couple of days ago too. I've had my eye on this bike, and a lot of people suggest it on the forums, but these reviews have me a little spooked. I can understand an occasional problem, but it sounds pretty consistent for a bike that is supposed to be the strongest frame around, at least according to Cervelo's own web site (I read it on the Internet, it must be true!) It sounds like a QC problem, if properly built it is super strong. The warranty covers you, but as the reviewers have said, you don't want to be without a bike while they take care of it.

    When I was looking at the R2.5 Chorus last week at the shop I asked about this problem and they were surprised by the question.

    That last reviewer took a Kestrel Evoke in exchange, but I've read that these have a similar problem with the seat stays. I also saw that a lot of the 2004 evokes were available as close-outs, never a good sign.

    Do a search on the R2.5 on this forum, and also on Bikeforums.net, and you'll see a lot positives too.

  3. #3
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    208
    Quote Originally Posted by Zac Fisher
    The warranty covers you, but as the reviewers have said, you don't want to be without a bike while they take care of it.
    Its not a warranty concern. It is a question of whether you want to sustain a severe injury when the frame fails during a long, steep descent, or in a very fast moving, tightly packed peloton. I couldn't care less about the warranty.
    Last edited by yzfrr11; 01-23-2005 at 05:17 PM.

  4. #4
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    2,969
    Quote Originally Posted by VeloFish
    I've read a couple of reviews of Cervelo's R2.5 carbon bike that have said the bottom bracket becomes unbonded or that the seatpost slips. Obviously, the first problem would be more of an issue. What can anyone tell me about their experience with the R2.5 - aside from those reviews posted.

    Thanks!
    http://www.bikesportmichigan.com/rev...rvelor25.shtml

  5. #5
    Bling Bling Master!
    Reputation: Florentine Pogen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    429

    Red face Wow!

    An unbiased review.

  6. #6
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    14
    I've read that review, too, but the problem seems to be with their production frames sold to the general public. I don't doubt that it is a great bike, if you don't have a problem.

    So the questions are: are the reviewers with the problem the only ones with the problem, did all of their bikes come from one bad run, did a few bad ones slip through, is it a general QC problem with CF? Is it a design issue? All of the above?

    I was still gung-ho on getting one until tonight. Since the lbs I'll buy it from is probably Cervelo's biggest retailer, I'll ask at the LBS about problems they know of. Funny thing is, they never steered me to one, but they showed me a lot of stuff. Maybe that's because the DA model is out of my range, and a built up frame is also. The Chorus edition was at the top of my range though, but still unavailable at the time.

  7. #7
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    10,126

    low credibility..

    Every article this guy writes reads like TV infomercial. Mostly BS. For example, a frame that's no more than 1 pound lighter than his previous LOOK frame somehow ends up being a 4-pound lighter bike. Must be magic.

    He wrote an equally flawed article on Colnago geometry. You need hip waders to get through it. http://www.bikesportmichigan.com/reviews/colnago.shtml

    One thing I'd get clarification on is their geometry. The drawing on the Cervelo website shows the STA as a line from the center of the BB through the center of the seat rail clamp at some unspecified saddle height. If this is the case, then the STA by the "normal" definition would be steeper than advertised, making the TT length longer than expected.

    http://www.cervelo.com/bikes/2005/R2....html#Geometry
    Last edited by C-40; 01-24-2005 at 06:08 AM.

  8. #8
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    12
    Have you tried emailing Cervelo and questioning them directly? I had a worry about the geometry of their Soloist and I dropped them an email. I got an answer back within a day or so, and I was happy with the information I was given.

    Apparently Gerard Vroomen responds to some of the technical questions, so maybe drop them a line and attention the email to him?

    Good luck!

    tt

  9. #9
    Cat Herder
    Reputation: bigdeal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    151

    .....

    yes, it is true that Gerard responds to email regularly, I have actually gotten responses (yes, more than one) from him regarding their products. As far as the R2.5, I've inspected one of their 2005 bikes and all I can say is 'beautiful'. When I asked them about their 2004 vs 2005 models they responded by saying the tubes are made in Taiwan but the assembly and finishing are done in Canada.

  10. #10
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    147

    Cervelo 2.5

    Going along with the 2.5 questions, I thought I read somewhere that the frame used for the 2.5 Chorus model and the 2.5 Team model are slightly different, with the Chorus model being slightly inferior. Am I mistaken? Anybody know?

  11. #11
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: elviento's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    1,230

    Agree with that. The geometry chart is indeed quite unprofessional

    The toptube length is not even center to center. Makes me doubt whether they know what they are doing. Aesthetically, I think the Cervelo is still a couple of levels below Time, which I unfortunately cannot afford.

    As for the review, it just cannot be from someone who does not have an economic interest in promoting the sales of that bike.

  12. #12
    Burning Fists of Love
    Reputation: ttug's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    6,901

    Ask Gerard

    Quote Originally Posted by bigdeal
    yes, it is true that Gerard responds to email regularly, I have actually gotten responses (yes, more than one) from him regarding their products. As far as the R2.5, I've inspected one of their 2005 bikes and all I can say is 'beautiful'. When I asked them about their 2004 vs 2005 models they responded by saying the tubes are made in Taiwan but the assembly and finishing are done in Canada.

    Gerard has responded to me as well in email andI have to say that he is very responsive to any questions concerning the performance of a Cervelo product.

    He is also grounded, and will also tell you the shortcomings of a product he provides. Thats rare and impressive.

    Warranty issues stopped me getting a Cervelo as the 5 year warranty on a bike over 1500 bucks aint my speed. But, thats me and again, email him.
    This old anvil has cracked alot of hammers

  13. #13
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    2,969
    Quote Originally Posted by elviento
    Makes me doubt whether they know what they are doing.
    You can have whatever opinions of Cervelo bikes you want. But it's hard to believe Bjarne Riis and CSC would continue to use them as their bike supplier if they didn't know something about what they were doing.

  14. #14
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    208
    Quote Originally Posted by asgelle
    You can have whatever opinions of Cervelo bikes you want. But it's hard to believe Bjarne Riis and CSC would continue to use them as their bike supplier if they didn't know something about what they were doing.
    $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

  15. #15
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    10,126

    got an address???

    I sent a detailed e-mail to cervelo's contact address and got a canned response with the answers to FAQ. Totally worthless.

  16. #16
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    2,969
    Quote Originally Posted by C-40
    I sent a detailed e-mail to cervelo's contact address and got a canned response with the answers to FAQ. Totally worthless.
    As I recall, they send a form response to acknowledge receipt of e-mail questions with a detailed answer coming later.

  17. #17
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: elviento's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    1,230

    Lol

    Or: CAN$CAN$CAN$CAN$CAN$CAN$CAN$

    :-)

    Quote Originally Posted by yzfrr11
    $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

  18. #18
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: elviento's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    1,230

    not exactly an opinion

    Not having ridden their bikes I can't really give an opinion. I am not saying they are crappy bikes, but those little things can indeed reflect how focused manufacturers are about making good products.

    As for the sponsorship, like zyfr11 pointed out, it's a money issue. Fuji and Tsunami sponsor pro teams too.

    Quote Originally Posted by asgelle
    You can have whatever opinions of Cervelo bikes you want. But it's hard to believe Bjarne Riis and CSC would continue to use them as their bike supplier if they didn't know something about what they were doing.

  19. #19
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    2,969
    Quote Originally Posted by elviento
    As for the sponsorship, like zyfr11 pointed out, it's a money issue. Fuji and Tsunami sponsor pro teams too.
    Money may control which bikes a team may choose to ride but a team won't continue to ride bikes that simply don't work. I would submit that the fact that CSC continues to ride Cervelos and was able to win both Classics and Grand Tour stages on them shows that Cervelo can't not know what they're doing. I don't know about Tsunami, but no one ever lost a race because they were riding a Fuji.

    Also, everyone harps on the fact that Tom Demerly sells Cervelos. This is true but he sells many other brands too, he could boost any of those if he didn't believe in Cervelo. What caught my attention in the review was the first line: "I bought a Cervelo R2.5 bike long before they were available because of a conversation I had with Cervelo's Gerard Vroomen." As a dealer, knowing what he does and given the range of bikes he had to choose from, he was willing to pay his own money for the Cervelo.

  20. #20
    Burning Fists of Love
    Reputation: ttug's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    6,901

    slippery slope

    Quote Originally Posted by C-40
    I sent a detailed e-mail to cervelo's contact address and got a canned response with the answers to FAQ. Totally worthless.
    He can be contacted at the Cervelo Yahoo group which is

    http://sports.groups.yahoo.com/group/Cervelo/

    His user name there is gocaillou and so far, he has mailed me back.


    However, as you may note: Gerard has created countless prototypes and really done some great stuff as far as making a better aero machine for the masses. You might want to check the "took a materials class 20+ years ago and own a bunch of carbon bikes attitude" at the front door.

    Not all Cervelo products are great, I agree, but I would be hard pressed to find any line of bikes where all of the models are perfection.
    This old anvil has cracked alot of hammers

  21. #21
    Burning Fists of Love
    Reputation: ttug's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    6,901

    its dejavu all over again

    Quote Originally Posted by yzfrr11
    Its not a warranty concern. It is a question of whether you want to sustain a severe injury when the frame fails during a long, steep descent, or in a very fast moving, tightly packed peloton. I couldn't care less about the warranty.

    Any bike, on any given day could have the issue you describe.Bikes fail, its a fact.

    The issue is where to get unbiased reviews. Thats a tough one and I agree, if there are "rumors" about a certain model failing, ride another bike to be safe. Otherwise, the argument that all of these bikes are unsafe because I heard....is pretty useless.
    This old anvil has cracked alot of hammers

  22. #22
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    8

    Thumbs up Haven't got mine yet, but...

    ...I've had a few of these frames in my hands and they're obviously well made. The finishing is as good or better than anything else I've seen. No poorly finished edges (around the lugs, etc), no excess drops of glue, no uneven clearcoating.

    I'm satisfied that this is a fine bike and I've put a deposit on an R2.5 Team. Everything I know about Cervelo gives me confidence that if there was an issue with some of the earlier frames, that they've been ironed out. Cervelo isn't in business to loose money, and they're still offering a lifetime warranty. If they backed-off and suddenly only offered a 5yr warranty, that would worry me, but they haven't done that.

    I've looked over a few of these frames and they're solid. I'm only suffering from the wait for it now.... ;)

    "The R2.5 was the first frame in its weight category to obtain the coveted EFBe certification. This means that the frame has survived what is arguably the toughest fatigue test in the bike industry. In fact, the R2.5 has survived it twice, because when EFBe couldn't break the frame in the first 100,000 cycles we asked them to run another 100,000 cycles. The frame still wouldn't budge. That's why we have no problem offering a limited lifetime warranty on all our frames. Keep in mind that most manufacturers do not dare send their frames to EFBe, and of all the frames that are sent, roughly two-thirds of them do not even make it through the first 100,000 cycles. "

    http://cervelo.com/bikes/2005/R25-Team.html

    Their geometry is explained here too.

  23. #23
    New Member
    Reputation: divve's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    2,603
    It didn't survive the toughest test nor is it the first in its weight class to obtain that certification:
    http://www.efbe.de/erenn.htm

  24. #24
    Burning Fists of Love
    Reputation: ttug's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    6,901

    cool link

    Quote Originally Posted by divve
    It didn't survive the toughest test nor is it the first in its weight class to obtain that certification:
    http://www.efbe.de/erenn.htm

    Thanks for the link.
    This old anvil has cracked alot of hammers

  25. #25
    New Member
    Reputation: divve's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    2,603
    .....just be very careful when interpreting that info. Rumors have it that several manufacturers have identical rigs in-house. They design frames to score well on the rig and use the results for marketing purposes. I don't want to sound like a Scott basher, but those guys now have a 980 gram MTB frame which passed. Fall with that frame and it breaks in half rather quickly.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Orbea Onix vs. Cervelo R2.5
    By kmb in forum Bikes, Frames and Forks
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 02-02-2005, 11:04 AM
  2. cervelo R2.5
    By perhim in forum Bikes, Frames and Forks
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-13-2004, 05:11 AM
  3. has anyone ridden a cervelo r2.5?
    By ghostrider1tm in forum General Cycling Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 08-08-2004, 10:53 AM
  4. Cervelo R2.5
    By key in forum General Cycling Discussion
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 03-09-2004, 09:44 AM
  5. Cervelo R2.5 Carbon
    By Henry Chinaski in forum General Cycling Discussion
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 02-27-2004, 12:17 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Sea Otter Classic

Hot Deals

Contest


Latest RoadBike Articles


Latest Videos

RoadbikeReview on Facebook