Scott Foil or Colnago EPS

Discuss light weight issues concerning road bikes & parts.
Post Reply
Posts: 27
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 6:42 am
Location: Russia

by camber66

Please help with new frame choice.
I already have Colnago EPS 61 traditional geometry during last 2 season.
It's a super bike, but with my 6'2'', is awfully not aero)))
Compare to my previous GIANT TCR Advanced ISP , old , 2007 year model.
Colnago about 1 km/h is slower at same power, course etc.
I don't want to use two bikes for trips on races since it is expensive in transportation in the avia plane.
I sold my Cervelo P3C, it is clear that it isn't comparable with a usual road bike, but Colnago with clip-on aerobar is awfully slow. It with comfort, but is senseless to participation in a TT races. As far as Scott Foil will meet my expectations, it is also possible it it will be slightly easier than Colnago (1250+360 gramm at 61s size).
I hope to hear of real responses of owners of Scott Foil, I consider 58 size.
Or I should continuing to enjoy Colnago, possibly it is my conjectures.
Cervelo was awful for bad pavings road, I couldn't give out on it the maximum power. It was uncomfortable and very rigid, ideal for glass road (not around).
I considered S5, but it is the same pain as it seems to me. If Scott same "a piece of plywood", it not option for me
Sorry for my poor english
Last edited by camber66 on Mon Dec 01, 2014 6:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.

by Weenie

Posts: 244
Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2010 4:24 am
Location: Ann Arbor, Michigan

by Stefano

Hi! It sounds to me like your two main criteria are comfort and aerodynamics. I have test ridden a scott foil, and while I have no basis to judge it's aerodynamics, it didn't feel any faster than my aluminum bike, but was definitely a lot more harsh (and I ride gatorskins at 120 psi most of the time, so it wasn't wheels/ tires).

I haven't ridden the S5, but from what I hear, it won't be as stiff bit definitely is one of the most comfortable aero road bikes. If it was me though, unless you're set on doing TT's in long distance travel races, I would just stick with the colnago. It sounds like a gorgeous bike, and it would be a shame to have to sell it. Whatever you chose, good luck at the races!

Posts: 96
Joined: Tue Aug 24, 2010 11:53 pm

by drewb

I had a foil 61cm...and I sold it pretty quickly. It was hard, stiff and harsh.

I miss have a Trek madone 7.9. Great bike. Much more comfortable, and handles differently to the foil. Possibly not as well on the front end, but that would be hard to prove.

I can't comment on the cervelo. All tunnel tests suggest that it is more aero than the Scott or the Trek.

Also, consider the 58 rather than the 61 of you can make it work fit-wise.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

Posts: 27
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 6:42 am
Location: Russia

by camber66

Ok, thanks for responses. I will continue to racing on Colnago EPS. 61S a little big for me.

User avatar
Posts: 6225
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 9:14 pm

by Calnago

Whew! By the way, from the pic it doesn't really look like your bike is too big but that's totally your call. Not sure why someone would suggest you get a 58 unless they had way more information about you than could be found in this thread, before the pic even. And when referring to its size it should be referred to as a 61, or 61 traditional. At first I thought your added "s" behind the 61 was just a typo but you did it again. The "s" indicates sloping which yours is clearly not and the largest sloping size they make is 58s. Maybe it was just two typos because you clearly know the difference.
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
legs 11
Posts: 3657
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2007 11:22 am
Location: Leg hurty

by legs 11

Looks pretty sweet to me Camber. :)
Personally, I would never even consider the change you proposed. :beerchug:
Pedalling Law Student.

User avatar
Posts: 6807
Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2006 10:29 am
Location: Athens, Greece

by kgt


Posts: 27
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 6:42 am
Location: Russia

by camber66

Yes, it's my mistake,
61 size (not sloping) have 590 mm ETT. The original Colnago seatpost will be replaced to 3T Ltd with zero feedback. It will allow to install saddle optimum ~ 80-90 mm of seatback from BB. It 's large size frameset problem, with 73 degrees of a saddle tube. The saddle appears too behind. I'm look to something is shorter with ETT 580. To buy new Colnago ... it it is expensive. It is strange that they aren't really appreciated in the secondhand market. Maybe because Colnago use oldschool lugged technology. All people look to new modern aero sexy frameset. I continue to use in the winter the youthful steel GIOS TORINO (I am 42 years old), and it isn't much worse present top carbon.

by Weenie

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Last post