was at my LBS today, actually trying to buy this frame. And then he was telling me that there is a maximum rider weight limit of 75kg for this frame imposed by Storck. Somehow it didn't sound very convinsing so I became unsure if it was true or if it was just because he wanted to sell me something he already had in stock. Anybody in the forum who can confirm this weight limit? I am 82 kg and would take a size M. Anybody who is already is riding the 0.9 with some experience?
Why don't you just contact Storck directly and ask them youself? the contact E-Mail is on their website; I had talked to them a while ago and had only the best experience. If they shouldn't be able to help you in english (which would amaze me since their alloy frames are produced by Kinesis in US), drop me a line.
A while ago Markus Storck himself participated in german speaking "Tour" forum in a thread about carbon frames. I'll quote one of his postings here, it might be interesting, even if it is not exactly an answer to your question:
(One of the participants had asked whether he could ride the 0.9 safely and said he was currently using a Colnago C40 which he liked:)
my clumsy translation first:
Markus Storck wrote:
"80-90% of our customers buy the C1.1. Its stiffness is higher. So it is the better choice for most riders (it isn't always about 150 Gramm).
Answering XXX's question: At 72 kg and a height of 1,92 it would be no problem at all to ride a Scenario C0.9. The downtube of the Scenario Carbon family is proportional (55 and 59) and in size 63 also the upper tube and the steering tube. That way we receive a higher stiffness in the steering tube area and in the BB area according to the height of the frame. This makes the 63 cm Scenario C1.1 look very sturdy and it makes better proportions for a frame that size. That might look strange at first sight, but the taller riders will be happy about that! By the way, in my opinion the Colnago C40 has been the reference in carbon frames for years!"
the part about the "proportional geometry" might sound clumsy - my limited knowledge of english might multiply the fact that Markus' writing is not very clear about that in the first place... i understand it that way that they use more layers of CFK for larger frames, up to framesize 59 only at the downtube, for larger sizes on down tube, upper tube and steering tube.
(this is something that few carbon frame makers do, as it causes the production to become more expensive AFAIK)
That's the german text, the whole thread can be seen at http://dk-community.de/tour/showthread. ... adid=16534
Markus Storck wrote:
"Der C1.1 wird zu 80-90% von den Kunden gekauft. Der C1.1 die höheren Steifigkeitswerte. Für viele Fahrer die bessere Wahl (es kommt ja auch nicht immer auf rund 150 Gramm an).
Nun aber zur Frage von XXX: Bei 72 kg bei 1,92 wäre es überhaupt kein Problem ein Scenario C0.9 zu fahren. Die Scenario Carbon Modelle haben ein proportionales Verhältnis des Unterrohres (55 und 59) und bei 63 auch zusätzlich des Oberrohres und Steuerrohrbereiches. Dadurch erzielen wir eine höhere Lenkkopf und Tretlager Steifigkeit passend zur Rahmenhöhe. Der 63 cm Scenario C1.1 sieht brachial aus und wirkt viel gefälliger zur 63iger Rahmenhöhe. Auf den ersten Blick ist er aber für viele sicher gewöhnungsbedürftig aus. Aber die großen Fahrer wird es freuen! Meiner Meinung nach war übrigens der Colnago C40 über Jahre die Messlatte im Carbonrahmen-Bereich."
Snowman and Strong Walker
my old stuff
my new stuff