I believe that site is treated with great derision on a regular basis on the Bicycling buyers forum, where those with some engineering expertise sneer at its crude methodology. While there is some fear of fatigue life on thin walled alu frames (though apparently not most of the Cannondales on that site), the world is not littered with cracked/fatigued carbon frames, though they have certainly been ridden a long time by now. As far as that goes, the site says a significant % of bikes failed the test, yet we don't hear a lot of such real life stories (except for, to some extent and sometimes disputed, Cannondales, which some call "crack 'n fails" - I don't know..I've never had one). Makes you wonder about this test's relevance.
I have been less than impressed with the R2.5 comments on roadbikereview.com - easily chipped paint and other fit and finish concerns, even though the buyers like how it rides.
In my view there is, at this point, no comparison between Craig's carbon expertise (backed by a 25-year warranty) and Cervelo's. The Tetra also looks a lot more interesting. To me, the R2.5 is just another set of 3rd-party tubes glued togather. If I liked that look, I would wait another couple of years to hear more real world feedback. The feedback on Calfee's product has been deafeningly good for years, so no need to wait for a Luna, Tetra or Dragonfly.
--------------------
"You never make a gift of Ventoux"
Eddie Merckx to Lance Armstrong
|
Previous
Thread Index
Next
Flat
Re: Has a Calfee ever been EFBe Certified?
Edit
Reply
Quote
