Decision necessary: SK Pininfarina vs. Colnago Concept

Discuss light weight issues concerning road bikes & parts.

Which one would you chose? Please state why in the thread!

De Rosa SK Pininfarina in 540
9
53%
De Rosa SK Pininfarina in 560
4
24%
Colnago Concept in 52S
4
24%
 
Total votes: 17

SchallUndRauch
Posts: 78
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2018 6:58 pm
Location: East of West

by SchallUndRauch

Seriously thinking about one of these two frames...!

Sizing is one reason: I am looking for a reach of around 385-395mm and a stack of max 570mm. Max saddle height needs to allow for 825mm from centre of bb to top of saddle. With most aero bikes that fit my reach/stack ideal, the proprietary saddle posts are too short...

However, they are long enough on the SKs, as a friendly bike shop has confirmed. No info yet on the effective saddle post length of the Concept, though...

Another reason of course is that both Concept and SK are beautiful frames, and available in gorgeous red :))

SK Pininfarina in 540 - Reach 389mm, Stack 550mm, max Saddle height 825mm+
SK Pininfarina in 560 - Reach 394mm, Stack 568mm, max Saddle height 825mm+
Colnago Concept in 52s - Reach 384mm, Stack 561mm, max Saddle height unclear

The SK review on Cyclist.co.uk https://www.cyclist.co.uk/de-rosa/1160/ ... ina-review (they tested the rim brake version) critisized it for not being stiff enough. I am wondering two things: Is the disc brake SK stiffer than the rim brake version, caused by the additional carbon necessary for disc brakes? And even if an SK is a bit less stiff than the stiffest bikes - could that be the desireable capacity for "planing" that Jan Heine writes about here? https://janheine.wordpress.com/2014/11/ ... s-planing/

Thank you in advance for weighing in!

bm0p700f
in the industry
Posts: 4836
Joined: Sat May 12, 2012 7:25 pm
Location: Glermsford, Suffolk U.K
Contact:

by bm0p700f

I go with the one that fits best. That's probably going to be the most aero.

They are both pretty bikes.
Last edited by bm0p700f on Sat Dec 22, 2018 12:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.

by Weenie


User avatar
wheelsONfire
Posts: 2789
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2014 8:15 am
Location: NorthEU

by wheelsONfire

Agree with above.
Bikes:

Ax Lightness Vial EVO Race (2018.12.21)
viewtopic.php?f=10&t=156137
Paduano Racing Fidia (kind of shelved)
Open *UP* (2016.04.14)


Ex bike; Vial EVO D

SchallUndRauch
Posts: 78
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2018 6:58 pm
Location: East of West

by SchallUndRauch

Well thanks, and I don't want to seem ungrateful, but that's a bit of a truism in this case, as all three fit. The question is of accepting spacers vs a slightly shorter stem

User avatar
Mockenrue
Posts: 476
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2012 10:32 am
Location: UK

by Mockenrue

I have a 52s Concept. With 755mm from the centre of the BB to top of saddle (Arione R1) the seat post is out to just below the '60' mark if that's of any use. Obviously I'd need to take it out to check the full length but from memory when I built the bike it was pretty long, so I think there's quite a way to go before the minimum insert marker:

Image

SchallUndRauch
Posts: 78
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2018 6:58 pm
Location: East of West

by SchallUndRauch

It would be fantastic if you could do this, err, because Christmas spirit and all :beerchug:

moonoi
Posts: 566
Joined: Sat Nov 21, 2015 3:04 pm
Location: Earth

by moonoi

This is the length of the seatpost from the min insertion line on a concept.

Image

I have the same BB to saddle height as you (82.5cm) and went with a 56s, in your case, depending on the height of the saddle rails from the clamp, you might just get the height with it at the min insertion point on a 52s...I wouldn't risk it





SchallUndRauch
Posts: 78
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2018 6:58 pm
Location: East of West

by SchallUndRauch

Argh, that's the death of the 52S... Seat tube is 520mm, plus apparently 240mm effective seatpost, plus 40mm saddle equals 800mm :-/
Thanks for checking!

User avatar
Calnago
Posts: 8334
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 9:14 pm

by Calnago

I don’t know anything about you other than your saddle height, so I have to assume you know what you’re looking for, which just be a very huge saddle to bar drop with a very long stem, correct? I just can’t imagine anyone with a saddle height of over 82cm opting for a size 52s (Colnago).
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

SchallUndRauch
Posts: 78
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2018 6:58 pm
Location: East of West

by SchallUndRauch

Well almost: My inseam is 93cm, short torso, longer arms. My reach is as stated, but I like a 150mm drop between saddle and handlebar.

User avatar
Calnago
Posts: 8334
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 9:14 pm

by Calnago

Ok then... sounds like you know what you’re after.
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

SchallUndRauch
Posts: 78
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2018 6:58 pm
Location: East of West

by SchallUndRauch

After two bike fits, I hope so :) But one is never totally sure, or totally constant in his measurements, I feel.

Mr.Gib
Posts: 3591
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 4:12 pm
Location: eh?

by Mr.Gib

From purely a brand perspective the Colnago would be my choice. A bit more desireable.

More important is the issue of fit. Have you had a good fitter take look at you? Looking at the basic numbers, the frame sizes you are considering seem too small. I am with Calnago as far as the Concept goes. 52s doesn't seem right. If you need a 52s to get your required drop, then maybe it's the wrong frame. Pushing the limit on seatpost insertion should tell you something.

Seriously, at your height, inseam, etc., 54s is the correct size for Colnago if you are seeking an aggressive postion. Yes the stack is 8mm above your max, but perhaps an additional 0.5 degree bend in you elbow will solve the problem. :noidea: As an added bonus, the higher front end of the 54s will put you in a more aerodynamic position.
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.

SchallUndRauch
Posts: 78
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2018 6:58 pm
Location: East of West

by SchallUndRauch

Yes, I have been looking at the 54s as well. But still, saddle height will be a tight thing, and maybe a showstopper. It's 540mm seat tube + approximately 240mm seatpost +40mm saddle =820mm. So chances are, I would have to pull the seat post out some 5mm over the minimum insertion... With 90kg, not something I would want to risk.
The nice thing about the De Rosas is that they have 380mm seat posts.

by Weenie


User avatar
Calnago
Posts: 8334
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 9:14 pm

by Calnago

Mr.Gib wrote:...I am with Calnago as far as the Concept goes. 52s doesn't seem right. If you need a 52s to get your required drop, then maybe it's the wrong frame. Pushing the limit on seatpost insertion should tell you something.
Actually, if he really wants to ride a drop of ~150mm, then a 52s is probably the only size that could get him there in a Colnago because any higher of a headtube and he will be hard pressed to achieve that drop with that saddle height. Trouble is, on a 52s you can’t get the saddle that high anyway without a longer seatpost. When guys are talking about riding with a saddle/bar drop in those ranges, I’m just bowing out and hope they know what they’re doing. So, would probably rule out the Concept completely on that basis.
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

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post