RoadBikeReview.com's Forum Archives - General


Archive Home >> General(1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 )


Colnago C-40 B-stay vs. "older" rear triangle(3 posts)

Colnago C-40 B-stay vs. "older" rear triangleGregGil
Jun 18, 2001 9:55 PM
Any thoughts or opinions on the 2001 Colnago C-40 B-Stay rear triangle vs. the pre-2001 rear triangle on the C-40? Especially interested in the effect on ride quality. Thanks.
re: Colnago C-40 B-stay vs. "older" rear triangledbobee
Jun 18, 2001 11:08 PM
I hear the B-Stay is notably stiffer (harsher)in its ride. This is only what I have been told as I could not find a new or old model to try. I landed up just ordering a Calfee which I did try and liked very much. The bb and chain stays are super stiff but the ride is very smooth plus I saved some money.
re: Colnago C-40 B-stay vs. "older" rear trianglecarbon-ti
Jun 19, 2001 11:27 AM
I have a pre-2001 C-40. IMO the seat stays only influence the ride quality marginally, the bigger effect is through the tires and wheels. I got my C-40 after the B-stay design was announced - couldn't stand the clunky look of the new C-40 versus the more elegant seat cluster of the old C-40. The new design cuts down on assembly time for Ernesto and Co.

Old or new C-40's ride fantastic - the Star fork makes them ride even better.