Road Bike, Cycling Forums banner
1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I am in the market for a new carbon hot rod. I am looking for somethign with a 56 cm top tube. I have somewhat funky proportions, and prefer a steep seat angle. I don't want to go custom again (I'm pretty anti-custom these days) so I'm looking for a production hot-rod in the 56 range with a steeper seat tube angle.

So far, the Scott CR1 (56 tt / 73.5* seat angle) and Look 585 (56 tt / 73.75*) seem to be the carbon bikes with the steepest ST angles. Can anyone recommend one of these bikes over the other? I am 5' 9", 150 pounds, 31 years old, and pretty strong. I mainly race offroad, but have gotten more into road racing this year. I consider climbing to be my biggest strength.

I have heard reports that the 585 is flexy in the bottom bracket, and that worries me. I haven't heard anything negative about the Scott, except that it is made in Taiwan.

Can anyone help? I am also open to suggestions for other, non-custom carbon frames with a steeper ST angle.

Thanks for your help.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,161 Posts
odd dimensions...

Buying a frame based only on the TT length is often a mistake. If you're only 5'9" tall, then I assume that you have short legs and a long torso? Are you also using a 130 or 140mm stem? If not, then you need more stem length, not more TT length. I'd also be curious to know what type of seat post you use (setback or not) and what makes you think you need this much TT length. I suspect a far-forward riding position is fueling this desire for lots of top tube length.

Keep in mind that it's the frame's reach that should be compared, rather than the TT length. Reach takes into account the difference in the seat tube angle. Steeper seat tube angles make the reach longer.

A 55cm LOOK would be vertically too large. A recreatioal rider might ride 53 and many racers might select a 51cm. Likewise, a large Scott CR1 is also vertically too large for a rider of your size. Either one would end up looking like a touring bike with the saddle low and the handlebars up high.


http://www.scottusa.com/product.php?UID=7961&feature=geometry
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
251 Posts
Hey SJS,

Nice position to be in. I have been riding a Colnago Supermissio for the last 6 years and this past weekend I was able to demo a Cannondale 613 for the 100 mile Canejo ride in Thousand Oaks Ca. WOW! What a bike and what a ride. Check it out for sure.
Durace, Cannondale Crank, Kyserium SLs and FSA carbon handle bars.

It was fun and considering I got fitted Friday night for a Sat century, not too bad.

Best Rocco from Boston
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
354 Posts
C-40 said:
Buying a frame based only on the TT length is often a mistake. If you're only 5'9" tall, then I assume that you have short legs and a long torso? Are you also using a 130 or 140mm stem? If not, then you need more stem length, not more TT length. I'd also be curious to know what type of seat post you use (setback or not) and what makes you think you need this much TT length. I suspect a far-forward riding position is fueling this desire for lots of top tube length.

Keep in mind that it's the frame's reach that should be compared, rather than the TT length. Reach takes into account the difference in the seat tube angle. Steeper seat tube angles make the reach longer.

A 55cm LOOK would be vertically too large. A recreatioal rider might ride 53 and many racers might select a 51cm. Likewise, a large Scott CR1 is also vertically too large for a rider of your size. Either one would end up looking like a touring bike with the saddle low and the handlebars up high.


http://www.scottusa.com/product.php?UID=7961&feature=geometry

I have a 585, am 5 foot 9, with an 85.5cm cycling inseam (fairly long), 76.5cm saddle to BB height, and am running a 120 stem with about 10cm of drop right now. Also, I am not very flexible (although I am getting better-I can touch my toes now!) My bike is a 53cm, and it is probably the best fit I have yet had. It feels very balanced with the 120 stem, like I always am very balanced. I would think that the 55cm would be too long and pretty sluggish. With regards to BB stiffness, I don't feel anything "soft" there. The fork isn't as precise as the ONDA on the Pinarello Dogma however-just a little softer and more supple. Absorbs more road vibrations, and still goes where I point it. It is really a great bike for somebody who wants a very light, neutral, fast race bike, that is super comfy on bad roads.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
354 Posts
WEG said:
What about someone who is 6'1" - what size would that equate in the Look 585??

Thanks

Will
I would say ballpark 57cm, but you may want to do some measurements. I set a guy up on a 585 57cm that was 6 foot 0, with about 6cm of drop and a 120cm stem. He had a pretty long torso though, and wasn't in that aggressive of a position.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,161 Posts
long legs, short torso...

Like me, you're long in the legs. Your inseam is 2.5cm more than mine and you chose a 2cm larger frame, which seems entirely approriate.

The guys who have problems are those of your height with 3-4cm shorter inseams. For some reason their fitters are reluctant to chose the frame size appropriate for their inseam and saddle height, using a 120-140mm stem and/or long reach bars to to care of the torso length. It's a better solution than buying a larger frame that's 1cm longer in reach but 3-4cm too tall.
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top