2010 Litespeed Archon C2 (Bike Build)

by Felix Wong | 31 Aug 2011

Considering my passion for cycling, it may surprise you that I didn’t have a single two-wheeled non-motorized vehicle that was designed and built in the 21st century. Until this year. I actually skipped a whole decade (the 2000s) and, in late 2010, purchased a heavily discounted Litespeed Archon C2 frame. It would become the basis for my Super Bike.

Litespeed is famous for their legendary titanium frames, but aside from a brief foray into using carbon fiber between 2002-2006, never used the black magic material until their 2010 Archon C1, C2, and C3 range. After years of development and leveraging some carbon fiber and aerodynamic know-how from its sister company Quintana Roo (a triathlon bicycle maker), Litespeed came out with a unique product that not only is sexy in its lines, but boasts a number of features that distinguish it from other carbon fiber bikes coming out from Taiwan.

Below is a list of modern day features the Archon incorporates (some are proprietary, where noted). In the column next to them are what my Cannondale 3.0 features in order to compare and contrast some of the advances in bicycle technology made between 1992 and 2010.

*Aerologic is Litespeed’s proprietary tube feature set that includes “invisible” water bottle shrouds, bowed out fork and seatstay tubes for reduced airflow pressure and increased comfort, and Reactive Pressure Moulding.

As you can see, about the only things the 2010 Litespeed Archon C2 and 1992 Cannondale 3.0 have in common are 1) the basic double-diamond frame shape and 2) having replaceable, aluminum rear derailleur hangers (which I think was another Cannondale innovation back in the 80s).

To complete the Super Bike, I mounted SRAM components (mostly Force) and other lightweight goodies as listed in the table farther below.

Despite having an aerodynamic frameset, the Super Bike currently weighs only 14.9 lbs. with pedals, compared to the Cannondale’s 19.0 lbs. That’s a four-pound difference. With water bottle cages, she’d be right at the UCI weight limit for the Tour de France!

Components

I cherry picked all of the components, all from online vendors (particularly eBay). Huge dollar savings came from Real Cyclist, which at the time seemed to be one of Litespeed’s preferred blow-out distributors.

All weights listed above are actual weights confirmed with digital scales. The individual components were weighed with a postal scale, and the total weight was confirmed with a lower-resolution bathroom scale.

Specifications

My Archon C2 is a size Medium (M).

Ride Impressions

After I first put together the Litespeed and rode it, I couldn’t immediately tell if it was any faster than my Cannondale—a little surprising considering the above technological “advances” listed above and a weight of several pounds less. And though the ride felt different, I wasn’t even sure if it felt any more comfortable.

But after riding the Super Bike in 300km, 400km, and 600km brevets in Colorado, I think there may be something to its weight, stiffness, and comfort advantages. At least my times for those distances were superior and I felt relatively fresh afterward.

Regarding the supposed aerodynamic advantage, however, I cannot confirm it either by subjective feel or objective numbers. Litespeed claims a 20-watt savings at 30mph at various yaw angles versus a conventional bicycle, but in unscientific coast-down tests, I actually think the Cannondale goes faster. (For example, going down the north Horsetooth Dam in Fort Collins, I routinely can exceed 50 mph on the Cannondale, whereas the one time I went down it on the Litespeed I only hit 46 mph.) Whether this is because of weight—particularly the C’dale’s significantly heavier wheels—or because my position on the Cannondale is a little more aggressive and aerodynamic, is up for speculation.

Her Most Epic Rides

In August 2011, I rode the classic Boston-Montreal-Boston 1200km (750 mile) course, which included over 30,000 feet of climbing, in 3.4 days. The Litespeed did great.

Then in June 2015, we did the 4,233-mile Trans Am Bike Race. Despite getting Shermer’s Neck, I finished in 8th place. The race was too much for my body but not too much for the bike!

Her Name

I’ve named all my wheeled machines, and thought of names like Litey and Speedy. But the name that stuck over years was simply “the Super Bike.”

Tubeless Conversion (September 2016)

In September 2016, I successfully converted the existing wheelset to tubeless.

This added a mere 8 grams:

The Super Bike, therefore, should have weighed 6783 grams (14.9 pounds) after the tubeless conversion per all the calculations above.

However, none of the above included a few accessories. Two Serfas Cirque SL carbon fiber water bottle cages (26g each) and the Italian Road Bike Mirror (54g) added another 106g. So the total bike weight should have been 6889 grams (15.17 pounds).

But somehow, the measured weight (which is presumably more accurate than the calculated weights) with accessories came out to be slightly less, at 15.02 pounds (6.81 kg)!

July 2025

It’s now 15 years after I built the bike, and it is still my primary bicycle—albeit in Spain. I do intend to buy a more modern bicycle, but that I’ve been riding this one so long underscores how ahead of its time it was. Almost all bicycles in the pro peloton now have some aerodynamic features, and my Litespeed still weighs less than almost all of them thanks to the UCI minimum weight limit of 6.8 kilograms (15.0 pounds).

I will still be riding this bike in the upcoming 1600-km London-Edinburgh-London randonnée, however, and did some upgrades and important maintenance in advance.

One was swapping out the FSA 40-cm alloy handlebars for a Kocelvo Aero 3 carbon fiber one. This is 36 cm wide with internal cable routing and a flat top. It includes little “winglets” to cover up where the cables come out of it. Its advertised weight is 240 +/- 20g, so it should weigh about 20g less than the old handlebars. It looks better and is theoretically more aerodynamic and shock-absorbing—all for 33€, including shipping.

Top-end bicycles may be expensive nowadays, but carbon fiber parts like handlebars are remarkably cheap compared to 15 years ago!

After riding it a number of times, I definitely prefer the narrower 360 mm width (measured center-to-center). I have the brake hoods angled in so that they measure about 330 mm center-to-center.

While I was at it, I replaced the handlebar tape with some cushier Rock Bros. black tape with red backing. I think it looks more harmonious with the bike’s paint scheme than the red tape I was previous using.

Another upgrade I did was replacing the brake pads. The old ones were some generic red pads that came with the ultralight Mr. Control CNC brakes. They still worked fine, but I replaced them with Shimano R55C3 ones. Front and rear pads in total cost only 12€, but was an important safety upgrade, particularly since the rear ones were worn almost all the way through and I will need plenty of stopping power on the long, steep descents of London-Edinburgh-London.

I also tried my best to realign the rear derailleur hanger, which was bent, and replaced the rear shift cable. The rear derailleur now shifts more precisely, with lower effort at the levers, than it ever had during the last 10 years.

Lastly, I replaced the rear tire with a 700x28c Schwalbe Pro One TLE Evo. This tire has low rolling resistance, good ride quality, and is lightweight and easy to mount. When my front 700x25c Hutchinson Fusion 3 tire is worn down, I will replace it with another one of the Schwalbes. Until then, I will run 75 PSI in the front tire and 70 PSI in the larger volume rear.