PSM wrote:Why does Pierre Rolland choose the M10?
He's a professional. Professionals have also been known to choose to ride bikes with broken elbows, collar bones and pelvises.
This does not mean it would be life enhancing for me to do the same.
Moderator: robbosmans
PSM wrote:Why does Pierre Rolland choose the M10?
Calnago wrote:Absolutely. One should never let the bars dictate where you sit on the bike. The proper seated position is first and foremost in the fit process. Everything else follows from that.
Franklin wrote:Calnago wrote:Absolutely. One should never let the bars dictate where you sit on the bike. The proper seated position is first and foremost in the fit process. Everything else follows from that.
I know that this will get a lot of flak, but:
Seating isn't nearly as exact than people make it out to be....
Calnago wrote:In the example, it seemed that the bars are forcing the rider to sit much further forward than he'd like to be. And that's not right. Get the seated position right first, then set the bars appropriately.
Calnago wrote:Franklin wrote:Calnago wrote:Absolutely. One should never let the bars dictate where you sit on the bike. The proper seated position is first and foremost in the fit process. Everything else follows from that.
I know that this will get a lot of flak, but:
Seating isn't nearly as exact than people make it out to be....
@Franklin: no flak from me. In fact, completely agree. I don't think anyone was implying you sit in one spot as if you're glued to your saddle; however, there is a range that is appropriate for each person. What is not good is if you allow the bars to dictate something different and "out of the range" that's optimal for that individual. In the example, it seemed that the bars are forcing the rider to sit much further forward than he'd like to be. And that's not right. Get the seated position right first, then set the bars appropriately.
ichobi wrote:The new Europcar paintjob is superb. I wish they sell it to the public.
Bely wrote:Ok.. My 2 cents worth: current stable includes a pinarello think 2 and a colnago c59. Both have exactly the same set ups (handlebars brakes etc)...wheels I split the usage between both bikes a pair of enve 1.25(tunes) and lightweights. The colnago is such a plush ride.. I love the colnago it's so much more comfortable. That's about all I can say for now
c50jim wrote: ...To go back to the OP, yes, there is something about Colnagos. At 62, I have a lifetime supply of C40s (two brand new never ridden, three more with 500-5,000 km on them) because they're my favourite bike but I'm still considering a C59. I've had or have pretty well all the carbon ones except C59 as well as steel, ti and aluminum. All handle well and predictably. After a crash three years ago that kept me off the bike for 10 months, I want a bike that I feel confident on at speed (one of my local routes has a nice 75 km/hr descent). I'm happy on my Colnagos, my Wilier or my Pegoretti, but sold my Parlees because they just didn't "feel right". Funny, I'd put 20,000+ km on the Parlees before the crash and didn't have that concern.
.......
Pritchet, try one. Compared to Cervelos I've owned, I'd rate my Colnagos as a bit slower handling but predictable as were the Cervelos, heavier but probably a little plusher ride (and my Cervelos were R3 and RS, not one of the S models).