Here you go, my new C59 in 56sloping - used to have an EPQ in 58sloping. I will write up a review of the C59 versus the EPQ shortly.

C59 Campy Record 11 speed, Mavic SLR wheels, Deda Zero 100 cockpit, Regale Saddle and Time peddles - 17 pounds on the button.

For my size I like sloping better, yea there is a spacer tower there, but I'm not as flexible anymore and it's fine by me.

Feel free to add your thoughts.


DSC_7016 by thevelomonkey, on Flickr


DSC_7011 by thevelomonkey, on Flickr

Great looking bike.

I'll be really interested in the C59 vs. EPQ ride report. I have a Super Record EPS gruppo sitting at my LBS waiting for a frame. I'm thinking C59 but am concerned that it may be more racy than I'd like since I prefer my C40 to my EPS and suspect the C59 is even more "modern" (i.e. stiff at the expense of everything else). And of course, there's no 59cm C59 in stock that I can find in North America, so I'm looking at mid-summer for an electronic frame.

Anyway, get out there and enjoy that baby and let us know how well you like it.

Great bike.

Also looking forward to the comparative review!

_________________
Cervelo R3, Campagnolo Chorus/Record mix... pastatrails.blogspot.com
And you can call me Macktastik Honey Pete Kicks, thank you.

Super nice bike. Everything works well. Looking forward to the ride review as well!

Nice bike...understated but perfect.

Get some zipp tubular wheels...those Mavics are heavy.

C59 agains the EPQ

As indicated here and in other posts, I owned a EPQ in 58 sloping for a year and assessed I bought it one size too big - so I purchased a C59 in 56 sloping.

First and foremost I did, in fact, have too big of a frame. The C59 fits me way better. So how does the EPQ stack up to the C59? It's very hard for me to say for certain as any bike that isn't fitted properly wont feel as efficient as a properly fitted bike.

With that said, the C59 does feel just a bit more "tight." By that I mean when it goes over rougher roads it just feels that much more solid. Both frames are plenty stiff - they have the same rear triangle - really only the top tube and down tube are different - and it aint by much. I will say the C59 tubes are sexy as all hell. The ribbing, however Ernesto does it he does it right - it's a different tube set, but is still very much a classic bike. The paint on each bike is total artisan, though the underside of the downtube on the C59 with the big Colnago letters and the Italian flag is about the coolest design out there on any bike.

I didn't feel any difference in handling, except again, the C59 fit properly so of course it's going to maneuver a bit better. Again, very hard for me to give a total review of the EPQ since it didn't fit - here is what I can say, and I don't think this is due to the EPQ, it was due to size - with my larger EPQ I never "loved" my colnago. I liked it and I loved the artisan aspect of it, but I never felt like I had a fast ride on it and when I did go fast I felt like I was working, not harder per se, but working. I stuck with Colango and got the C59 in a smaller size which turned out to be a huge improvement. The end result - I love the entire bike whereas before I liked the ride, but loved the design. Now I love both the ride and the design.

I pulled up to my first group ride and immediately got comments on how great the bike looked. There is just zero doubt in my mind that Ernesto knows how to design a bike and then paint them in such a way that they are heads and shoulders above all else. I had also gotten an inside deal on a pair of Mavic SLR wheels, on the EPQ I didn't really feel one way or the other on them - I could take them or leave them. On the proper fitting C59 I had a total 180 - I now love the wheels and can tell their advantage over my other clincher wheels.

So, would I get an EPQ - you bet your butt I would - if it was good enough for Zabel it's good enough for most anyone. Would I get C59 over a EPQ - yes I would, not because the ride quality is better, and I think it is to a small degree, but because the lines on the tubes are just sexy as all hell and still hold onto their classic design.

Given my new frame I now love colnagos on multiple levels and will most likely be a lifetime buyer (contingent they keep their artisan aspect going).

Let me know if you have any specific question - glad to answer them.

I got a pair of Mavic Tubulars and they are way lighter and they ride incredible, and trust me, I love tubulars. I still need the somewhat convenience of a clincher - and, yes, I have a pair of hand built clinchers, too - and the SLR wheel is a great wheel that isn't too heavy, a bit more than 1500 grams - it is sexy as all hell in all black - and the MP3 program for a $1 made it a deal not seen anywhere else. Totally happy with those wheels as my all around summer/spring and fall wheel.

@ronderman: how tall are you? I am surprised that size 58s was too big if I see the lenght of the seatpost and the spacers you used. Please explain because I am thinking about a C59 and I am between 56s and 58s.

_________________
Specialized Tarmac S-works SL4
http://i891.photobucket.com/albums/ac11 ... 11af34.jpg

@ronderman: how tall are you? I am surprised that size 58s was too big if I see the lenght of the seatpost and the spacers you used. Please explain because I am thinking about a C59 and I am between 56s and 58s.

_________________
Specialized Tarmac S-works SL4
http://i891.photobucket.com/albums/ac11 ... 11af34.jpg

@ronderman: how tall are you? I am surprised that size 58s was too big if I see the lenght of the seatpost and the spacers you used. Please explain because I am thinking about a C59 and I am between 56s and 58s.

By the way I am 186cm and "inside leg size" is 79cm

_________________
Specialized Tarmac S-works SL4
http://i891.photobucket.com/albums/ac11 ... 11af34.jpg

@poppiholla: I`m 183cm and I have a saddlehight of 79 cm! I ride a 58 trad. witch is a 54s and I would go for a 57 trad. if I could.
Are you sure about your inside leg size?

@ronderman: CSF-Inox

Yes I am sure (79cm = 31.1024 inch between center bracket and top of my saddle). My tighs are also relatively short. I find it important to see enough seatpost sticking out of the frame and I don't like too much head tube spacers (30mm of spacers is the max). So I think that I can have a 58s with a 110mm stem or a 56s with a 120mm stem. With the 56s I see 20mm more seatpost sticking out of the frame. With the 56s I need a lot more head tube spacers (18.7 vs. 20.4) so that's why I think that 58s is better for me???? So the complete aesthetic look of the bike is also important for me. I don't do races by the way and I would love to ride a c59 next to my beloved Tarmac S-works sl4.

_________________
Specialized Tarmac S-works SL4
http://i891.photobucket.com/albums/ac11 ... 11af34.jpg

I am 6'3" with an inseam that is maybe just under 32" or thereabouts.

I had both a 56s and a 58s - i am between the two models - honesty, for me, I liked the look of the 56s more. Tall bikes to me start to look strange in the seat stays when they are too high. I still race, though that is getting less and less.

The best comparison is a 60cm Cannondale - the 56s is a 60cm dale and the 58s is a 62cm dale. Yes the top tube is a cm shorter, but your overall length from saddle tip to stem will be the same due to how Ernesto sets up the bike.

Let me know if I can help anymore. If you look at my post you will see my PR99 58s too and see how that was setup.

If that's your saddle height, your inseam must be something different. My saddle height is 80cm, I'm 184 cm, and I have measured my cycling inseam to be 92cm... And I ride 54s with 130mm stem, and everything feels just perfect. My measurement from saddle tip to center of bars is 603mm, drop from saddle top to tops and hoods is 115 mm in the pic.

_________________
tumblr