No Cipollini RB1000k in the Milano-Sanremo

[ardennes777]

Hi Guys....... just a quickie (or 2...)

I was seriously contemplating an RB1K or RB800 for my next bike..... All this talk of "not stiff" and "cracks" now has me quite worried as I was under the following assumptions:
1. Both these models are extremely stiff; more so than the majority of other bikes on the market!!
2. Both these models have had a pretty "good" history regarding frame cracking/warrantable issues presenting themselves.

My questions therefore are directed to all on this forum but more specifically centered on those whom have had either one (or both!) of these bikes!

1. Are they not really "that stiff"??? Can you compare their levels of stiffness/greater stiffness/less stifness to any other bike you have ridden?
2. Is the RB1K really "aerodynamic" or just structured to look "aero"? Is there any rider proof (not factory figures) that this bike is aerodynamic and holds speed etc??
3. Are the frames really susceptible to cracking???

[kgt]

1. Right. Read PEZ review on RB1000 and other Cipollini review on the net.
2. Right. The frames are very well made with many layers of high quality carbon. That is why they are so stiff (and heavy).

1. Again: Cipollini frames are superstiff. Among the stiffest frames in the market. Maybe too stiff for the average rider.
2. RB1000 looks like aero and it definitely gets your body to aero position (that is what counts the most in aero). But don't expect any serious aero research, testing or design behind it.
3. No. These are real handmade in Italy monocoque frames of high standards and top materials (TORAYCA etc.).

If you had a basic knowledge-experience you would immediately understand that the 'tire rub issue' presented in this thread cannot possibly be an issue related to the frame...

[Mario Jr.]

The danish "cykelmagasinet" tested a Cipollini frame earlier this year. It was surprisingly enough not very stiff. Especially the front was quite flexy.
Also, I doubt that any of the Cipollini frames has seen any windtunnel time or significant CFD work. I have no idea where the notion that these frames should have superior stiffness or aerodynamics come from. I have only seen one emperic test, which is the one I'm referring to, and that didn't favor the frame very much.

[Ahillock]

What does "super stiff" even mean? We know that riders subjective feelings don't play into what real data shows much of the time. kgt, have some data for the stiffness claims? Plus, at what point is a frame stiff enough? Is "super stiff" any better than "stiff enough"?

Cipos bikes might be nice to look at for some, but they seem to lack substance when one looks below all the glitz and glamour. Just my $0.02.

[BlackMadone]

They lead in the break for for so long on the the RB800 which was really nice because I really love that bike. I just wish we saw more RB1K's in the pro peleton. I'm luck enough to have a major dealer in the area so I plan on going for a test ride soon.

[tinozee]

I agree about the looks, they look hot in all the races. I like a few of the continental team bikes actually - the team Wanty Cube, CCC Guerciotti, Nippo Vini Fantini on De Rosas, the several teams on cipos... I'd like to try them all. They all stand out as great looking but you never know til you ride yourself.

[maverick_1]

@Mario Jr,
Can you recall the model that was tested?

Cheers

[Mario Jr.]

I'll try to find the magazine. They had an Italian theme where they tested a handful Italian top bikes. Colnago, Basso, Bianchi, Cipollini and a few more. They are testing with a fixture similar to Tour Magazine to have some emperic numbers to suplement the ride impressions, and the Cipollini came out worst in regards to both weight and stiffness.
But it's funny like some brands and models can be elevated to a level where they don't belong (and here I'm talking strictly technically) For instance the De Rosa Protos is continually being mentioned as a very stiff frame, when both "Tour" and "Roadbike" in Germany both has tested it to be the opposite, which is surprising when seeing that giant down tube.

[cymans]

Hi, i thought i would wade in with some comments from my own personal experience with the Cipollini brand.
I'm a part time mechanic at a Cipollini dealer in the UK and have built a few RB 1000 and Bond bikes.
I found the RB1000/RB1k to be very stiff from the BB area and rear triangle and the front end very pointy.
The geometry is very aggressive ( low head tube ) and with minimal overall compliance the RB1K might not be your first choice for a +100 mile ride.
A good deal of physical flexibility would be useful to fully exploit the frame. And you can fine tune the bike by experimenting with tyre choice and pressures.
The Bond in my opinion is the more usable frameset, it's a bit more compliant but still the power transfer is very very good.
Okay, i know it's not the lightest frame out there, but sometimes it's not always about weight.
I had the option to buy any Cipollini frame, and i went with the Bond and running 23mm wide rims and 25mm tubulars.
The bike as a whole is fantastic and a real joy to ride all day if needed. It tracks lovely going down hill and you feel you can push the limits of grip in the corners. I would consider myself a climber rather than a sprinter and although i have lighter complete bikes the Bond climbs quicker because the power transfer feels more direct.
The only criticism of the frames would be the paint work. Moreover the hardness of the paint, it seems to chip fairly easy.
I'm an automotive painter by trade, and the Cipollini's really do apply a lot of paint. But the overall finish is very good.

I really cannot comment to much as far as the RB1K rear wheel rub on the frame, but iv'e never seen or heard of this happening.

I hope the above helps anyone considering buying a Cipollini.

Cyman.

[fletch62]

1. How can people on the internet, diagnose the problem with the frame from a picture, over and above the guy that has worked on the bike first hand?
2. Isn't the rubbing in a weird area? Its on the seat stay, near the brake bridge. Surely if it was a wheel issue, the first place it would rub would be at the bottom bracket/chain stays?

[stormp]

Here is the rb1000 that cykelmagasinet has testet


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ahillock]

Hi, i thought i would wade in with some comments from my own personal experience with the Cipollini brand.
I'm a part time mechanic at a Cipollini dealer in the UK and have built a few RB 1000 and Bond bikes.
I found the RB1000/RB1k to be very stiff from the BB area and rear triangle and the front end very pointy.
The geometry is very aggressive ( low head tube ) and with minimal overall compliance the RB1K might not be your first choice for a +100 mile ride.
A good deal of physical flexibility would be useful to fully exploit the frame. And you can fine tune the bike by experimenting with tyre choice and pressures.
The Bond in my opinion is the more usable frameset, it's a bit more compliant but still the power transfer is very very good.
Okay, i know it's not the lightest frame out there, but sometimes it's not always about weight.
I had the option to buy any Cipollini frame, and i went with the Bond and running 23mm wide rims and 25mm tubulars.
The bike as a whole is fantastic and a real joy to ride all day if needed. It tracks lovely going down hill and you feel you can push the limits of grip in the corners. I would consider myself a climber rather than a sprinter and although i have lighter complete bikes the Bond climbs quicker because the power transfer feels more direct.
The only criticism of the frames would be the paint work. Moreover the hardness of the paint, it seems to chip fairly easy.
I'm an automotive painter by trade, and the Cipollini's really do apply a lot of paint. But the overall finish is very good.

I really cannot comment to much as far as the RB1K rear wheel rub on the frame, but iv'e never seen or heard of this happening.

I hope the above helps anyone considering buying a Cipollini.

Cyman.

No offense Cyman, but you used a lot of typical roadie "buzz words."

"Climbs quicker"
"power transfer feels more direct"
"very stiff"
"minimal overall compliance"


Lots of the same buzz words we keep hearing bike reviewers write over and over again. Even perpetuated in cycling forum discussions and on the road as we ride with a group. What do those comments even mean and could you even state those if you were blind tested? Previous discussion on this forum regarding how a cyclist perception of those things are actually very poor when empirically tested. Take out all of the bias for a brand or preconceived notion about what expects or is told they should expect, and maybe those aspects you think you noticed really aren't there. Is it really stiff? Or is it stiff because that is what you have been told by the Cipo company/distributor/regional representative/reviews/other riders? Mario Jr. mentioned that in an empirical test (using data), the Cipo didn't test out all that stiff.

Why does this bike climb "quicker" than any other frame? I thought a bike climbs because of power output of your legs and lungs? Sure slight geometry differences in a frame might make a bike feel better for climbing or descending, but stating one frame is better than another for climbing (besides significant weight differences between them) just seems a bit far fetched. Don't you think? Just another one of this "shit cyclist say" type things.

What does "power transfer feels more direct" even mean? Why don't your other frames transfer power directly? Does the chain take some long and haphazard route to move your wheel? I have owned and ridden many middle and high end frames. Hard to impossible to tell anything regarding "power transfer" and "more direct." A properly made and designed bike will be just as "direct" as any other properly made and designed bike. It is the legs and lungs that are the limiting factor. Not the frame. Unless you have some quantitative data showing how the Cipo/Bond is much better at this "power transfer", "being more direct," or "better at climbing" than the other brands out there? Call me skeptical, but show me some data.

[53x12]

I'll try to find the magazine. They had an Italian theme where they tested a handful Italian top bikes. Colnago, Basso, Bianchi, Cipollini and a few more. They are testing with a fixture similar to Tour Magazine to have some emperic numbers to suplement the ride impressions, and the Cipollini came out worst in regards to both weight and stiffness.
But it's funny like some brands and models can be elevated to a level where they don't belong (and here I'm talking strictly technically) For instance the De Rosa Protos is continually being mentioned as a very stiff frame, when both "Tour" and "Roadbike" in Germany both has tested it to be the opposite, which is surprising when seeing that giant down tube.

Here you go Mario Jr.




Frame-------------------------STW
Cippolini RB1000--------------- 71.7
Guerciotti Eclipse Plus----------- 125.3
Basso Diamante---------------- 137.1
Pinarello Dogma 65.1 Think 2---- 116.1

[itsacarr]

Not sure how relevant it is to the discussion but given how few people have actually ridden one of these bikes in the states ill chime in and say it was one of the more interesting bikes I have ever spent some time on. Was lighter than I expected given the frame shapes. Bike was built up with di2 and felt stiffer than my s-works. Bone jarringly so. But super fun. The geometry also made this one of the quickest bikes I have ever ridden in a 54 size. I remember noting if I could own one bike for the pure reason of excess and fun this would be in the running. I have heard several stories of the binders snapping on the seat post however.

Either way, definitely a cool bike. I would have to throw on some wide wheels and puffy tires though personally if I were going to enjoy those long hours.

[Liggero]

It really amaze me how people buy these bikes. Not only they have the Cipollini name on them, which is highly embarrasing, but also the design and appearance are incredible horrible...