Colnago C60 or???

Back by popular demand, the general all-things Road forum!

Moderator: robbosmans

rodebaron51
Posts: 341
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 4:38 pm
Location: Netherlands

by rodebaron51

1.92m
Pascal

2012 Colnago C59 MTBK Camapgnolo Hyperon Ultra 2 and Campi SR11
2014 Merida Big 99 CF team fully
2015 Pinarello F8 Sky Campagnolo Bora Utra 2 and Campi SR11 EPS (RIP after crash)
2016 Trek Mad-One Limited Team Edition

LionelB
Posts: 1595
Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 8:09 pm
Location: Aix en Provence

by LionelB

Hum. The 60s has a weird geo if you ask me. Extra long front center, it may ride OK but it may also be a tank, not sure as I have not seen one or heard of any owner. If you need a very large bike also look at the 62cm Pina F8, the geo sounds a little bit better to me and the head tube is very tall as well.

by Weenie


Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓    Broad Selection ✓    Worldwide Delivery ✓

www.starbike.com



LionelB
Posts: 1595
Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 8:09 pm
Location: Aix en Provence

by LionelB

And BTW I question the geo chart on the Collage web site as the 61 trad has an SCS that is longer than the 58s with the same STA this is quite strange.

User avatar
Calnago
In Memoriam
Posts: 8612
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 9:14 pm

by Calnago

Lionel, you must have misread the chart. Not possible for a 61trad to have a shorter Scs than a 58s with the same sta. I don't think the Scs is relevant for any sizing decisions anyway, providing you have the seat tube angle.
Rodebaron: Also, in your numbers above I think you've got at least one typo. A 61 trad does not have a 699 front center. It's 609mm if I remember correctly (I have two).
If your bike is a 62 and you have that many spacers and I presume a very high saddle height perhaps you should look at the 60s. But that seems like a monster of a frame and I think the large sloping Colnagos can look very awkward. As Lionel suggested, I wouldn't rule out a Pinarello as their head tubes are quite tall in similar sizes.
Last edited by Calnago on Sun May 17, 2015 5:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Colnago C64 - The Naked Build; Colnago C60 - PR99; Trek Koppenberg - Where Emonda and Domane Meet;
Unlinked Builds (searchable): Colnago C59 - 5 Years Later; Trek Emonda SL Campagnolo SR; Special Colnago EPQ

LionelB
Posts: 1595
Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 8:09 pm
Location: Aix en Provence

by LionelB

I was just on their site

61 trad SCs: 173
58s SCs: 160
60s: SCs: 164

All of them have a STA of 72.75. Which tells me something is wrong in that chart. Or they are measuring the SCs on sloping sizes lower rather than an equivalent SCs of the matching straight frame. Anyway..

User avatar
Mr.Gib
Posts: 5548
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 4:12 pm
Location: eh?

by Mr.Gib

To the OP, if you really want to optimize your next bike purchase, see if you can get a frame with geometry that allows you to run fewer spacers. You are an absolute giant in cycling terms so I know this may not be easy. Sounds like you are not hurting in the wallet area so maybe high end custom carbon build. Colnago used to do custom - no idea now. I would rather ride a Trek that I could set up properly that a Colnago with a tower of spacers. Being in Europe a custom Parlee Z - Zero would be an exotic and very high quality bike to own.
Last edited by Mr.Gib on Sun May 17, 2015 5:03 pm, edited 3 times in total.
wheelsONfire wrote: When we ride disc brakes the whole deal of braking is just like a leaving a fart. It happens and then it's over. Nothing planned and nothing to get nervous for.

User avatar
Calnago
In Memoriam
Posts: 8612
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 9:14 pm

by Calnago

@Lionel: That seems right. And that's exactly how they're measuring. The horizontal distance from the BB to the center of the top of the seat tube. So a sloping frame with its shorter seat tube will also have less Scs (setback).
Colnago C64 - The Naked Build; Colnago C60 - PR99; Trek Koppenberg - Where Emonda and Domane Meet;
Unlinked Builds (searchable): Colnago C59 - 5 Years Later; Trek Emonda SL Campagnolo SR; Special Colnago EPQ

LionelB
Posts: 1595
Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 8:09 pm
Location: Aix en Provence

by LionelB

Calnago wrote:@Lionel: That seems right. And that's exactly how they're measuring. The horizontal distance from the BB to the center of the top of the seat tube. So a sloping frame with its shorter seat tube will also have less Scs (setback).


Measured that way it becomes a useless measurement. I know my ideal frame setback is 180, I think it would have made more sense to continue to report it as a "virtual SCS" relative to a virtual level TT. After all this is how the TT are reported in most cases. Anyway, not a big deal. I would still be curious to see a 61cm C60 trad :)

User avatar
Calnago
In Memoriam
Posts: 8612
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 9:14 pm

by Calnago

Yes, agreed. That's why I said it's an irrelevant measurement if you have the seat tube angle. But so is saying your ideal setback is 180mm. It's meaningless unless you also know the "stack" at which the setback is being measured from.
Colnago C64 - The Naked Build; Colnago C60 - PR99; Trek Koppenberg - Where Emonda and Domane Meet;
Unlinked Builds (searchable): Colnago C59 - 5 Years Later; Trek Emonda SL Campagnolo SR; Special Colnago EPQ

User avatar
Calnago
In Memoriam
Posts: 8612
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 9:14 pm

by Calnago

@Lionel, I think the 61 traditional would look pretty much identical to my Colnagos, at least from the side. You should get one so we can see :)
Colnago C64 - The Naked Build; Colnago C60 - PR99; Trek Koppenberg - Where Emonda and Domane Meet;
Unlinked Builds (searchable): Colnago C59 - 5 Years Later; Trek Emonda SL Campagnolo SR; Special Colnago EPQ

LionelB
Posts: 1595
Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 8:09 pm
Location: Aix en Provence

by LionelB

Calnago wrote:@Lionel, I think the 61 traditional would look pretty much identical to my Colnagos, at least from the side. You should get one so we can see :)

not doing the ginea pig on the 61trad :shock: Why don't you buy one first. :D

User avatar
Calnago
In Memoriam
Posts: 8612
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 9:14 pm

by Calnago

I bought a Trek. It's your turn.
Colnago C64 - The Naked Build; Colnago C60 - PR99; Trek Koppenberg - Where Emonda and Domane Meet;
Unlinked Builds (searchable): Colnago C59 - 5 Years Later; Trek Emonda SL Campagnolo SR; Special Colnago EPQ

LionelB
Posts: 1595
Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 8:09 pm
Location: Aix en Provence

by LionelB

Nope, not taking that bait :D Actually the last thing I need with the F8 is a C60, they may start arguing with each other in italien,

rodebaron51
Posts: 341
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 4:38 pm
Location: Netherlands

by rodebaron51

Pfffff... now I am even more puzzeled...

Cant change my own specs... so have to find me a bike that fits, but also looks nice.
My current one fits me (at least it feels great)....
The 60S is indeed a massively large frame... the 58S should be comparable to C59 62 cm traditional.... but then I have the spacers again....
Why isn't it more easier.

To the F8.... hmmmm maybe frame is better, but somehow.... I don't know
What about an Sworks?
But Sworks and Campa.... tja again... why isn't this more easier.

I heard trek is too flexible in the bigger frames. So thats a no go with 88kg.

Maybe I have to go and cry in a corner and "just" buy myself new bra's for my current ride..... grrrrr
Pascal

2012 Colnago C59 MTBK Camapgnolo Hyperon Ultra 2 and Campi SR11
2014 Merida Big 99 CF team fully
2015 Pinarello F8 Sky Campagnolo Bora Utra 2 and Campi SR11 EPS (RIP after crash)
2016 Trek Mad-One Limited Team Edition

User avatar
kgt
Posts: 8749
Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2006 10:29 am
Location: Athens, Greece

by kgt

If you really think an SWorks is a C60 alternative then go for the sworks. I would keep the C59 btw.

by Weenie


Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓    Broad Selection ✓    Worldwide Delivery ✓

www.starbike.com



Post Reply