HOT: Active* forum members generally gain 5% discount at starbike.com store!
Weight Weenies
* FAQ    * Search    * Trending Topics
* Login   * Register
HOME Listings Articles FAQ Contact About




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 18 posts ] 
Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: New Look 695 Aerolight
PostPosted: Wed Jun 26, 2013 5:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2011 8:09 pm
Posts: 252
Location: London
Image

Photo from Caley Fretz's instagram. Can't see a whole lot of the bike...

_________________
--Max.


Last edited by Maximilian on Tue Jul 02, 2013 2:04 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: New Look 695 Aerolight
Posted: Wed Jun 26, 2013 5:23 pm 


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 26, 2013 8:53 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 7:51 pm
Posts: 57
Location: Bournemouth, UK
More here

http://www.bikeradar.com/road/news/arti ... ica-37755/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


BB65 bottom bracket !!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 26, 2013 9:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 10:49 am
Posts: 781
Location: Mallorca, Spain
Its actually not easy to sling something lightweight and "air catching" under a helicopter..I wonder if its been weighted?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 27, 2013 8:37 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2004 9:41 am
Posts: 343
Location: FINLAND
Well, based on model 695 aero. No disc brakes, yet.
Some change for the Stem and lighter 1.5k carbon used. 65mm bottom bracket has been standart on Zed crankset many years.

http://roadcyclinguk.com/gear/look-unve ... light.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

_________________
Team KAS-RAK: http://www.pellossalo.fi/pellossalonnousu/
My Look 695 SR + EPS : http://www.pellossalo.fi/content/uploads/images/medium/Look695EPS.jpg
http://www.pellossalo.fi/content/uploads/images/medium/20120513_003.jpg


Last edited by Tumppi on Sat Jun 29, 2013 2:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 27, 2013 1:34 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 22, 2009 1:29 pm
Posts: 593
Location: UK
They don't seem to have done anythign "aero" to the main tubes of the frame?

It looks nice and neat hiding the brakes, but surely shaping the down tube a bit would have helped the "aero"?

_________________
"We live in an age when unnecessary things are our only necessities." Oscar Wilde

Pegoretti Responsorium
Parlee Z5i
Donhou Commuter
1946 MacLeans Featherweight (L'Eroica!)
1991 Cannondale SM1000 (currently being renovated)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 27, 2013 6:46 pm 
Offline
in the industry

Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 3:08 am
Posts: 88
Leviathan wrote:
Its actually not easy to sling something lightweight and "air catching" under a helicopter..I wonder if its been weighted?



WEIGHED....not Weighted.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 27, 2013 6:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 3:20 pm
Posts: 99
No. Weighted.
- defn: having additional weight


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2013 1:12 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2007 1:57 pm
Posts: 7408
Location: San Francisco, CA
When I see quotes such as "That saves a claimed 90g for the frameset and LOOK are able to get a complete bike comfortably under the 6.8kg UCI weight limit in a number of off-the-peg builds." ( RoadCyclingUK ) or "Look say the bike tips the scales under the UCI 6.8kg weight limit, so the four Cofidis riders who'll be using it during the Tour will presumably be adding some ballast to their machines." (BikeRadar) I wish the reviewer had pulled out a hanging scale (bike journalists all have hanging scales, right?) and checked it.

Caley Fritz @ VeloNews has a good review.

_________________
http://djconnel.blogspot.com/
Fuji SL/1
\


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 29, 2013 1:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2007 5:10 am
Posts: 1016
Location: South Florida
I really like the 695, although honestly not as much as the 595 I already own. A few things about it have put me off completely from buying/building one up. This "new model" adds things to what I don't like!

1. Price is unreasonably high for what other bikes in the same arena are going for.
2. I simply detest anything proprietary. The ZED crankset, as good as it may be, it is one thing in this bike that stands to me as "I don't like/want it". I would build it with Campagnolo, so I don't even know what the BB65 means for putting Campy cranks on it. The hidden brakes are another proprietary thing to hate for me. Plus, it is so marginally of a benefit, if any, that I can't for the life of me comprehend the complication. Other than adding another gimick to sell a new/same model bike.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 29, 2013 2:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2004 9:41 am
Posts: 343
Location: FINLAND
For the price, if you get + 600€ crankset, 150€ stem, 150€ seatpost and 150€ pedals to same baggage and now with 695 aerolight also 200€ brakes, I can say you got one of the best frames and fork under 3000€. Not so expensive anymore??

I have had Look 361, 381, 585, 595 and now 695 and believe me, there is a huge difference between 595 and 695. In fact 585 and 595 felt a bit similar. 695 front end is much much stiffer and Zed2 crankset is one of the lightest and stiffest what you can find on the market. It has also very low Q-factor.

But I understand you anyway. I'm also a bit worried about the integrated brakes...until I test ones. :-) I also like new aero C-stem.

_________________
Team KAS-RAK: http://www.pellossalo.fi/pellossalonnousu/
My Look 695 SR + EPS : http://www.pellossalo.fi/content/uploads/images/medium/Look695EPS.jpg
http://www.pellossalo.fi/content/uploads/images/medium/20120513_003.jpg


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 01, 2013 2:48 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2007 5:10 am
Posts: 1016
Location: South Florida
Tumppi, what front rings are you using with your ZED cranks? How good or smooth is the shifting compared to the SR cranks and rings? Especially with SR EPS!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 01, 2013 2:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 7:45 pm
Posts: 3290
Location: Natovi Landing
Tumppi wrote:
I have had Look 361, 381, 585, 595 and now 695 and believe me, there is a huge difference between 595 and 695. In fact 585 and 595 felt a bit similar. 695 front end is much much stiffer and Zed2 crankset is one of the lightest and stiffest what you can find on the market. It has also very low Q-factor.

.



I preferred the old lugged Looks. Not as stiff at the front end true, but ride so well ... nervosity!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 01, 2013 3:04 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2007 1:57 pm
Posts: 7408
Location: San Francisco, CA
dgasmd: the Zed cranks are easily the best stiffness/mass available (strongly correlated with axle diameter), so swapping those out would be the last thing on my mind. I'd be more concerned about Tumppi's comment that the ride quality was better on the 585, which was decidedly not up to the stiffness standards of most current carbon frames (unless you count the Calfee, which also gets excellent reviews for its ride quality).

I think the 695 is a very cool bike. I love seeing innovative, functionally-focused design. I'm not sure I'd want one, though, since I view frame flex as more of a low-pass filter than an energy loss mechanism.

_________________
http://djconnel.blogspot.com/
Fuji SL/1
\


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 02, 2013 2:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2007 5:10 am
Posts: 1016
Location: South Florida
dgasmd wrote:
Tumppi, what front rings are you using with your ZED cranks? How good or smooth is the shifting compared to the SR cranks and rings? Especially with SR EPS!


:?: :noidea: :smartass: :?:


Top
 Profile  
 
Posted: Tue Jul 02, 2013 2:00 pm 


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 02, 2013 2:51 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 7:45 pm
Posts: 3290
Location: Natovi Landing
djconnel wrote:
dgasmd: the Zed cranks are easily the best stiffness/mass available (strongly correlated with axle diameter), so swapping those out would be the last thing on my mind. I'd be more concerned about Tumppi's comment that the ride quality was better on the 585, which was decidedly not up to the stiffness standards of most current carbon frames (unless you count the Calfee, which also gets excellent reviews for its ride quality).

I think the 695 is a very cool bike. I love seeing innovative, functionally-focused design. I'm not sure I'd want one, though, since I view frame flex as more of a low-pass filter than an energy loss mechanism.


You're right about the 585 though for most riding I've come to view the relative softness is an advantage (I am 165lbs and 300 FTP on a good day). Better ride quality = more enjoyment = more enthusiasm = faster. :-)

Chose the 585 over my Ultimate SLX and S-Works Venge on a recent trip to the Pyrenees ...


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 18 posts ] 
Go to page 1, 2  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], Bing [Bot], Exabot [Bot], Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], HillRPete, MoPho, Orfitinho, topflightpro and 71 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

   Similar Topics   Author   Replies   Views   Last post 
There are no new unread posts for this topic. Look 795 Aerolight

[ Go to page: 1, 2, 3, 4 ]

in Road

Cronulla

46

4771

Wed Jul 30, 2014 5:41 pm

djconnel View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Look 695 Aerolight Slipping Handlebars

in Road

NamoNamo

4

420

Tue Jun 03, 2014 9:52 am

NamoNamo View the latest post


It is currently Wed Jul 30, 2014 6:02 pm

All times are UTC + 1 hour




Advertising   –  FAQ   –  Contact   –  Convert   –  About

© Weight Weenies 2000-2013
hosted by starbike.com


How to get rid of these ads? Just register!


Powered by phpBB