|Look 381i vs. 5900 vs. C-40||O|
Dec 21, 2001 5:11 PM
|I work for a shop in the U.S. The cost of a C-40 for myself is roughly double what it would be for the Trek or Look frameset. Does anyone have any time on two or more of these bikes (ride, descending abilities, sprinting, etc.). I know that this has been discussed before, but.... The trek has a lifetime warranty, look three years, while the Colnago may as well have no warranty. I am roughly 180 lbs. As I have stated below on another thread, the Look may be 300-400 grams heavier.|
|re: Look 381i vs. 5900 vs. C-40||gtx|
Dec 21, 2001 5:32 PM
|doesn't matter--whatever you get, you should be able to sell it for what you paid for it (or more even) if you don't like it. If you have the money, might as well go for the C-40 (if it fits)--that way you won't be wondering later. The main thing is to have a few bikes that you are very happy with by the time you get out of the bike biz. My $.02.|
|re: Look 381i vs. 5900 vs. C-40||CT1|
Dec 21, 2001 6:37 PM
|The 381i will only be a tiny bit heavier than the C40 but NOT BY MUCH.
I've built a 58cm C40 and and a 56cm 281 for my brother and they felt VERY similar in weight. FWIW, my brother says that the C40 is a tiny-tiny bit smoother than the KG. The overal difference in ride "quality" is virtually zero though. The KG is a MUCH better "buy" but the C40 does have a lot of cachet. Oh, the C40 has a Flash fork.... a Star fork would probably make the C40 quite a bit rougher in "feel". That's one STIFFFFFFF fork!
The Trek will feel MUCH different than either of the other two so make sure you get a test ride on one before you purchase. IMHO, the trek frame feels very "dead".
IMHO, for the money and ride quality the LOOK can't be beat!
|re: Look 381i vs. 5900 vs. C-40||Ian|
Dec 21, 2001 7:03 PM
|I would get the Look or the Trek. I have ridden the 5200, KG281 and currently the KG361. The 5200 is not as lively as the Looks, it didn't bother me but some people complain about it. Either way, it is tough to go wrong. I just don't see the Colnago being worth twice as much.|
|Go for the Look.||look271|
Dec 21, 2001 7:26 PM
|Not just because I have one (a Look kg 271), but my guys at our LBS always say how bad the quality control of Colnagos are. For their money, they prefer Looks. I've ridden a Trek-the 5500, I believe-very dead feel. Can't say much about the C40-I'm sure it's a sweet ride, but for almost 2X the Look-can't believe it would be any better. I weigh 180-185, FWIW.|
|buy based on geometry||ishmael|
Dec 22, 2001 8:59 AM
|the look and trek bikes both have really long top tubes...im sure they all ride just fine, unless the top tube is too long for you...warranty is a good thing too..|
Dec 22, 2001 10:12 AM
|Colnago and Trek decrease the seat tube angle as size increases, while LOOK holds a constant 72.5 degrees. The slack seat tube angle on LOOK models effectively shortens the top tube.
Most LOOK top tubes are not as long as Colnagos of the same size, once the effect of the seat tube angle is considered.
A 53cm (c-c) LOOK with a 54.8cm TT compares to a 55cm (c-t)Colnago with a 54.3cm TT. To correct for the 1.5 degree difference in STA, 1.8cm should be subtracted from the LOOK TT. The result is an effective length of only 53cm.
As frame size increases, the difference in TT length decreases. Some sizes are virtually identical in TT length.
Dec 22, 2001 2:16 PM
|Keep hammering this home.... sooner or later it will sink in.
My LOOK frame of equivalent seat tube length to my Colnago has a shorter effective TT length. So much for old wive's tales.
|What do you want???||C-40|
Dec 22, 2001 10:50 AM
|If you want flashy looks and envy from your cycling buddies, the C-40's the way to go. The Trek and LOOK are pretty plain potatoes by comparison. They also offer a lot more bang for the buck, if money is the issue.
I got a C-40 because I like the Rabobank paint scheme, it fits perfectly and rides great, even with the stiff Star fork.
There are geometry differences between these models that may make the fit of one a little better than the others. It depends on the particular size that you ride. Across-the-board generalizations aren't accuarate. The LOOK and Colango come in 1cm increments that should make it easier to get a good fit. At 180 lbs, I assume you need a fairly large frame. If not, you shouldn't worry about the frame weight. A pound off the body is just as important.
|What do you want???||Tetra-boy|
Dec 23, 2001 7:52 AM
|If you are looking at the top CF bikes on the market you owe it to yourself to consider the products from Craig Calfee (http://www.calfeedesign.com). This small manufacturer has a lot of experience, loyal customers and the ability to turn a custom frame for you. Before you spend a bunch of $$$, ride a Calfee.|| |