R3 and R3sl

greasedscotsman

OK, so I know the Cervelo R3sl is a lighter version of the R3, but how is it done? I assume they've used a better grade of carbon and the basic shape of the framesets are the same, is this right? Also what is the approx difference in weight? Oh and it's the 2010 framesets I'm thinking about...

flanners1

isn't it anywhere between 39g and 89g difference, n o one seems to have the definitive weight; for a £1K extra layout over the 'bog' R3? Obviously there are some in the sale as last year's colours etc, seems way over the odds to me for such a minor weight loss, unless I have missed something?

mfin

Got an R3... cant see why the money is worth the weight saving for the SL ...for those kind of figures you can get some serious bits and bobs to lighten an R3 ...a lot of people can save 89grams with a pair of £40 kcnc wheel skewers for instance.

SL would have to be within a few of hundred quid of the R3 to even begin to consider it for me.

FransJacques

Biggest things they did were:

1 - revised carbon lay up (i.e. more where it's needed, less where it isn't, and "better" fibre orientation)

2 - seatpost went down from 32.9 to 27.2

I reckon that #2 contributed most to the weight loss since the whole ST was shrunk in diameter. As explained in other threads I don't exactly love my (56cm) R3SL so if you're shopping around I wouldnt' kill yourself to look for a R3SL over a R3.

Note that from 2009 on the R3 (and the RS) all got the 27.2 seatpost.

mfin

Other thing is i think if i was looking for one Id be looking for deals, haggling now really before Cervelo do the clamping down on the retailers a bit which might affect the discounts ...PM me if you wanna know all the looking and sourcing I did.

mfin

Other thing is i think if i was looking for one Id be looking for deals, haggling now really before Cervelo do the clamping down on the retailers a bit which might affect the discounts ...PM me if you wanna know all the looking and sourcing I did.

andylav

Slane Cycles have some very good deals on 2008 and 2009 SL models and their prices for standard 08 and 09 models are very appealing also.

greasedscotsman

Blimey, didn't realise that it was such a small weight difference! Looks like the R3 is the one to get then!

And cheers mfin, PM sent...

relanium

Would you say the R3 frameset is equivalent to say:-
Specialized SL3
Trek Madone 6 Series
Pinarello Dogma.

on-yer-bike

I think its more than just weight. My 56 SL weighs 830 g, I think the R3 is near 1000 g. 08,09 and 10 SLs are all identical except for the colour scheme. 08 R3s had a much fatter seat post. I wouldn't pay the extra for the SL under normal circumstances. I just got mine at a very reduced price.

FransJacques

It's the equivalent in terms of it's a top of the line frame ridden by a pro-team, but all 4 bikes on that list will handle differently.

Some say they don't like the ride feel of Madone's, I don't know for sure.

Some say the Pino is one of the best handlers, I for one, would love to ride a Dogma in the Alps to check it out, I've never even ridden a Pinorello ever.

Don't know a jot about the SL3 except that many peeps really love them and the build is similar, not by accident, to the R series - big front triangle & BB, really small stays.

Frankly all 4 are waaay above anything any of us could throw at them - if you're really stuck just go on price and looks...

greasedscotsman

on-yer-bike wrote:

I think its more than just weight. My 56 SL weighs 830 g, I think the R3 is near 1000 g. 08,09 and 10 SLs are all identical except for the colour scheme. 08 R3s had a much fatter seat post. I wouldn't pay the extra for the SL under normal circumstances. I just got mine at a very reduced price.

Sorry, but I'm not sure what your getting at, I think it is just down to the weight. The 2010 R3 and R3sl both use a 27.2 seatpost, so the only other difference other than the colour schemes is the weight. So then is it worth spending so many pounds for a bike/frame that's so many grams lighter and I think most of the people on this thread say no, and I'm tending to agree!

Mind you, I still don't know what to get, I still quite fancy an Ti frameset

on-yer-bike

greasedscotsman wrote:

on-yer-bike wrote:

I think its more than just weight. My 56 SL weighs 830 g, I think the R3 is near 1000 g. 08,09 and 10 SLs are all identical except for the colour scheme. 08 R3s had a much fatter seat post. I wouldn't pay the extra for the SL under normal circumstances. I just got mine at a very reduced price.

Sorry, but I'm not sure what your getting at, I think it is just down to the weight. The 2010 R3 and R3sl both use a 27.2 seatpost, so the only other difference other than the colour schemes is the weight. So then is it worth spending so many pounds for a bike/frame that's so many grams lighter and I think most of the people on this thread say no, and I'm tending to agree!

Mind you, I still don't know what to get, I still quite fancy an Ti frameset

Not getting at anything. I just think there is more than weight as the difference between the 2 frames. The SL is built differently therefore it will probably perform differently.