Decision necessary: SK Pininfarina vs. Colnago Concept

[SchallUndRauch]

Yes, it's probably the end of the Concept for me - a pity...

A Colnago that would work, however, is the V2-R Disc in 52S. Stack 384, Reach 564 (perfect!), max saddle height 835mm. It's just not very aero, and info about its comfort is conflicting...

[angrylegs]

Get what fits the best, which sounds like the SK.

I've ridden a King and a Protos. The King was a great sprinter, smooth and agile. Of those two I'd get a Protos, personally. I was really happy with it, but these days personally I'm perfectly happy with a non aero frame and aero wheels. Fast enough. Well, you're never fast enough, and you do feel that little bit faster with an aero frame also, but I find they're often a little less responsive usually and don't ride as nice as non aero. Ymmv. Sadly I have not ridden an SK or any Colnago to advise you on your choice. The De Rosas I rode were really nice.

[jlok]

Voted for the SK but only because I like the look more. I have no idea how the geos (trail, wheelbase, etc) differences would make the handling.

[wheelsONfire]

There are so many bikes now, how did you come up with these?
I mean, if you can hold such an aggressive posture, there must be rows of frames that fit you?
I am your opposite.

[SchallUndRauch]

Uff, I wish it were so

Mostly due to my geometry, but some core strength as well, I really feel ok with a low handlebar, and in fact it helps me to stay comfortable. I do not perceive it as an "aggressive" position. I also like riding in the drops, more than most other roadies.

What I do not like is a long reach that stretches me out and makes my shoulders go up. Then my fingers go numb. The lower handlebar, on the other hand, helps me to keep my shoulders down

My saddle height is 825mm, so a long seat post is necessary. But most aero-ish bikes have rather short seat posts (as the seat tube often changes its diameter to accomodate the rear wheel, but probably also to limit weight). What they also have, is quite long reach, combined with low stack.

So when looking at geometries, my trilemma is
a) I can either go for a smaller frame with the reach of 385-395mm that suits me, and accept some typically 20+mm of spacers below the handlebar, or
b) go for a larger frame with my ideal stack of 570mm, and in turn accept a shorter stem to equalize the frame's typically longer reach. But this affects handling, as we all know.
c) Especially with a), but not only, the proprietary aero seat posts tend to be too short for my long legs. (If it was otherwise, I would already be on a Trek Madone SLR.)

I came up with these two frames after checking the usual suspects, and some unusual ones. There are one or two other candidates, but I was pretty sure that it is here where I could talk to people specifically about Colnagos and De Rosas

[wheelsONfire]

I find several bikes with stack 565mm and reach around 390-394mm.
Ridley, Cervelo, Factor etc etc.

Derosa, aren't these always quite low in stack and long in reach?
Colnago seems a bit more friendly?

I might be one of few, but lately i have several restrictions when it comes down to how a bike is fitting the rider.
Weight distribution, stack (spacers max 10mm), reach (no short stems with lots of spacers or a fast a steering bike)
Aero bikes seems to be for long reach posture riders only.
I personally would guess i am short reach posture for my lenght. Perhaps even standard on a good day!

I hope you find your new toy