# 595 or 586 or



## cured (Sep 21, 2008)

566?
I'm having a bit o'trouble deciding.
It is better to get an older 595 or the newer 586 RSP?
Or just getting a 566 ultegra?

I'm leaning towards the 595 but like the carbon nekkidness of the 586.
566 leaves some cash in the bank.

What to do?


----------



## ROCA RULE (Apr 11, 2009)

Geometry in the 595 Oz more race oriented, the 586 ia more of a climbing bike/comfort bike.

Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk


----------



## cured (Sep 21, 2008)

thanks!
I've read that about the two frames.
The reasons I'm considering the 595 is that it's lugged, and because I've heard so many good things about it.
Will I miss out if I pass on it?
Is the 586 just as good?
It's like taking crazy pills.


----------



## ChristianB (Jul 27, 2004)

Since 595 is not produced anymore, hence only available in limited supply and sizes, I think you might be forced to go with the 586 or consider the 695, which is fugly, but gets really good reviews from people who have ridden both 595 and 695. Only thing that would make me worry is all the "high-tech" stuff that Look has put on the bike (crank arm sizing, ISP, elastomers, the stem). It wouldn't be the first time such things led to problems (..and not for look either)


----------



## sp3000 (Jul 10, 2007)

I have a serious soft spot for both the 585 and 595 as they are the last of the lugged frames. I would get the 595, but I am not basing that on anything other than cool factor. I'll let the people that have ridden both make useful comments!!


----------



## canyonchaser (Jun 14, 2011)

I had the same dilemma when I purchased mine, but I ended up going with the 586 Origin. I think Lugs are a thing of the past, they are heavier and modern frame building and technology has surpassed them - its why nobody really uses them anymore.

The 585 is still a fantastic frame, and they work brilliantly, my buddy has one and I've ridden it several times (we are the same size), but I honestly prefer the ride of my 586. 










dp


----------



## ChristianB (Jul 27, 2004)

canyonchaser said:


> I think Lugs are a thing of the past, they are heavier and modern frame building and technology has surpassed them - its why nobody really uses them anymore.


..Or because it is cheaper to produce non-lugged frames?

Lugged frames are heavier, but since companies like Parlee and Colnago are still making them for their top bikes, maybe the technology isn't completely outdated.


----------



## canyonchaser (Jun 14, 2011)

ChristianB said:


> ..Or because it is cheaper to produce non-lugged frames?
> 
> Lugged frames are heavier, but since companies like Parlee and Colnago are still making them for their top bikes, maybe the technology isn't completely outdated.


I disagree. I think at one time they were the way to go. With a monocoque, if you design and build it right, it should be able to outperform a lugged frame in every way. but, if you build a monocoque wrong, it can be much worse. 

But the way most every credible company builds and develop modern monocoque frames using the best engineering knowledge, racing data and computer technology... I assure you if lugs were better, almost everybody would still be using them. Bikes already cost upwards of $10-grand, so you can't convince me that everyone (including LOOK) stopped using lugs because of cost...

Colnago and Parlee still use them because they are more traditional brands and will always be behind the rest of the field - which isn't always a bad thing - many new technologies and ideas, I'm convinced, are gimmicky, so a little discretion can go a long ways.  But I would not rule out a monocoque frame over a lugged one because the "lugs are superior". 

So going back to the OP - both frames are wonderful - but just because the 585 has lugs, does not make it better than the 586 - there may be other reasons that make the 585 the better choice for the OP, but the lugs should not be a deciding factor unless the you like the aesthetics of lugs, and at that point; who cares. Aesthetics trump all. 

dp


----------



## sp3000 (Jul 10, 2007)

TIME still use lugs on their top frames, I'm sure tradition has something to do with it but they are pretty good frames!
In the end what makes up a frames characteristics becomes very personal to what the rider will like. I believe their are two reasons lugged frames are less common, one is the cost of manufacture, monococque is a cheaper method, but I think the main one is that consumer pressure has pushed for lighter frames and in that regard it is easier to make a monocoque frame lighter so that is where the push is.


----------



## balatoe (Apr 15, 2009)

I have both Look 585 and 586. Both are excellent bikes. However, the biggest difference between 585 and 586 are the front end and the bottom bracket area. The front end of the 586 is noticeably stiffer than the 585 and the bottom bracket on the 586 is beefier than the 585. In my opinion, both 585 and 586 are good long distance bikes. They are both comfortable, but the 586 climbs a bit better than the 585.

I have talked with several 595 owners. Based on their feedback, the 595 appears to be built for racing, as it is quite a bit stiffer overall, compared to the 585.


----------



## cured (Sep 21, 2008)

Thanks all!
Very difficult decision but I think I'm banking some cash and going with the 566.
This will be my first carbon frame and I didn't want to get stuck with something I may not like.
I was leaning towards the 595 but the ISP means making a commitment.
The 586 rsp has a shorter head tube and that worried me a bit.
Any truth that the frames run a bit small?
I currently ride a 49 and was going with an XS.
Thanks again.


----------



## maximum7 (Apr 24, 2008)

> I think Lugs are a thing of the past, they are heavier and modern frame building and technology has surpassed them - its why nobody really uses them anymore.


I'm sorry, but I couldn't disagree with you more.



> I believe their are two reasons lugged frames are less common, one is the cost of manufacture, monococque is a cheaper method, but I think the main one is that consumer pressure has pushed for lighter frames and in that regard it is easier to make a monocoque frame lighter so that is where the push is.


I completely agree with you. 
Also to note. Look as moved most of their frame production from their factory in Tunisia, to China....to save money as well. 
Sure monococque is getting better all the time, but there is magic in them lugs me says. 

To the OP, the magic of the 586 and 595's is the ISP and the elastomers. If you are unsure of your fit, then I can understand your hesitance in going that direction. 
That said, I have ridden the 566 and it is a very smooth riding frame. Smoother than my 585, but it all depends on what your uses will be for it. 
If you go with the 566 go original like this one

Good luck with your decision and let us know what you decide. Of course pics are a must too!


----------



## cured (Sep 21, 2008)

I also believe in lugged construction, or at least tube to tube.
If I remember correctly, the 595 is lighter than the 566.
I was disappointed that the 566 was manufactured in the East, but at that price point I guess one cannot complain.
It was either take a chance on the 595 and run my old Veloce, or the 566 and pick up some new Chorus.
566/Chorus is winning, but I'm still waffling.


----------



## sp3000 (Jul 10, 2007)

595 and you will have no regrets, you can always upgrade parts as you go, the frame you will have much longer.


----------



## Ppopp (Jun 20, 2011)

cured said:


> I also believe in lugged construction, or at least tube to tube.
> If I remember correctly, the 595 is lighter than the 566.
> I was disappointed that the 566 was manufactured in the East, but at that price point I guess one cannot complain.
> It was either take a chance on the 595 and run my old Veloce, or the 566 and pick up some new Chorus.
> 566/Chorus is winning, but I'm still waffling.


Have you found a shop that will sell you a 566 frame (I thought they were only available from Look as complete bikes), or were you going to buy a complete bike and swap parts? The latter can get expensive.


----------



## Ppopp (Jun 20, 2011)

canyonchaser said:


> I think Lugs are a thing of the past, they are heavier and modern frame building and technology has surpassed them - its why nobody really uses them anymore.


One can only imagine what a team like Europcar could have accomplished in the Tour last year if only they weren't handicapped by having to ride lugged carbon frames. Perhaps even 10 days in yellow and a win on Alpe d'Huez would have been within reach if they were riding monocoque frames.

[In a snooty French accent] "Damn zese heavy lugs. My kingdom for a monocoque frame."


----------



## maxxevv (Jan 18, 2009)

Ppopp said:


> One can only imagine what a team like Europcar could have accomplished in the Tour last year if only they weren't handicapped by having to ride lugged carbon frames. Perhaps even 10 days in yellow and a win on Alpe d'Huez would have been within reach if they were riding monocoque frames.
> 
> [In a snooty French accent] "Damn zese heavy lugs. My kingdom for a monocoque frame."


Rolland did ride an M10 up Alp d'Huez. As did Voeckler and most of the team in parts of the race. 

Though, for the most part Voeckler was on his specially painted and custom sized C59 while carrying the Yellow Jersey.


----------



## maximum7 (Apr 24, 2008)

I don't know why Look is wasting their time with Cofidis....oh wait, yes I do. They're French. 
Such a shame. 
Gone are the good 'ol days when Hoshvod rode 585's and 595's to victory.

www.cyclingnews.com presents the 95th Tour de France



> Hushovd surged to the line aboard Look's top-end 595 Pro Team which, despite its slender appearance, is apparently strong enough to cope with the huge levels of stress put through it by the Norwegian strongman. Unlike most of its competitors who use modular monocoque construction, Look prefers a more traditional tube-and-lug method to join the very high modulus carbon tubes to the forged high modulus carbon lugs along with carbon nanotube-enhanced resins for better carbon layer adhesion and improved durability.


Gee has a monocoue Look frame won a TDF stage yet?

Look moved closer to "ordinary" when they did away with their lugged frames.
I rue the day I have to put down my 585.


----------



## hux (Oct 30, 2011)

In only a short period of ownership I have grown to love my 585 (NOS 2009 Proteam). 
They say you have a good bike when you WANT to ride it. 
I therefore have a GREAT bike. I love to ride and am p155ed off when I can't.
Lugged or Mono....who cares.

anyone here seriously say they would not take a free 695 or nago C59 if it was thrust upon them?


----------



## Chris-X (Aug 4, 2011)

If you're riding any look you're riding a very good bike. While the characteristers may differ slightly, I've been riding a KG 381 matte black for the last month and it's great. I'll be back to riding my Roubaix S-Works SL2 in a week which I also enjoy. Different bikes, both compliant, S-Works tremendously stiffer at the bb. You can flex the bike sideways when pushing the pedals perpendicular with the Look, with the Roubaix, not so much. It doesn't seem to make much of a difference riding. I seem to want to spin and pedal with more "suppleness" on the Look. I have a Jalabert 381 also which seems slightly stiffer. 

Anyway, I haven't heard any complaints about the 566. If you're going to race get a CAAD 9 or 10. Otherwise, I'm sure the 566 is fine.


----------



## Ppopp (Jun 20, 2011)

maximum7 said:


> I don't know why Look is wasting their time with Cofidis....oh wait, yes I do. They're French.
> Such a shame.
> Gone are the good 'ol days when Hoshvod rode 585's and 595's to victory.
> 
> www.cyclingnews.com presents the 95th Tour de France


Interesting. You can see in the closeup of the stem/headset that he's not using any spacers or the tapered alloy ring above the stem, and he's using a conventional top plug in the steerer (and not the Look rubber cap).


----------



## exotec (Dec 28, 2010)

I owned a 2008 586, I loved to ride the bike in Austian alps, excelent climber and very good on downhill.


----------



## cured (Sep 21, 2008)

sp3000 said:


> 595 and you will have no regrets, you can always upgrade parts as you go, the frame you will have much longer.


This is true.
The thing is, once I cut the seat post, I own it.
Whether or not I like it.
The shorter head tube also worries me.

Leaning towards the 566 again.

Thanks for all the replies, I'll be sure to post up once I figure this out.


----------



## pennstater (Aug 20, 2007)

I have a 585 and a 595. My wife has a 566. If you are a heavier rider you may find the 566 not stiff enough. For a lighter rider probably OK. My wife loves the comfortable ride. 

I am about 250 and really enjoy my 585 Optimum. It is almost as good as the 595 on hills, but has better all day comfort. 

These frames do perform differently for different weight riders. I recommend test rides if possible.


----------



## kramnnim (Feb 24, 2009)

balatoe said:


> I have both Look 585 and 586. Both are excellent bikes. However, the biggest difference between 585 and 586 are the front end and the bottom bracket area. The front end of the 586 is noticeably stiffer than the 585 and the bottom bracket on the 586 is beefier than the 585. In my opinion, both 585 and 586 are good long distance bikes. They are both comfortable, but the 586 climbs a bit better than the 585.


I have a 585 that I love, but have been shopping around for something new. Would a 586 be a worthwhile upgrade? And...would you happen to know how much of a weight difference there is between the two?


----------



## cantride55 (Sep 19, 2008)

The 595 is a great bike. One that wants to be pushed. If you're out for a spin, it can be a little rough to ride on less than perfect roads though. With the stiffer b.b, it's not for everyone. You need the legs on this steed.
The 585 does everything well, some will say very well. I don't know if it does anything great.
The 586 is a strange beast. Comfortable, compliant and with a front end that gives off confidence. It soaks up road vibrations rather well and seems to give a nice amount of flex in the b.b. My personal evaluation is/was (I traded my 2012 replacement frameset in) the rear end was unpredictable. It seemed to lack something. Maybe the seat stays being attached lower to the seat tube changed the characteristics? I don't know. Bottom line any of these are great frames for the right person. I'll miss my 586.
OP, test ride all of them, more than once if possible. Which ever you get, you'll be pleased with. Why?? Because you'll be riding your bike. The one you picked out by making a informed decision. Test ride !


----------



## Bnystrom (Oct 27, 2007)

*First rides on a 585*

First, a little background:

After spending the past 15 years riding a pair Ti bikes ('96 Lemond Ti RS, '98 Litespeed Vortex) I picked up a Pinarello CX Carbon cross bike and made the "mistake" of riding it on the road. The difference in lateral stiffness compared to my Ti bikes made it clear that it was time for another carbon road bike (I previously owned a '77 Exxon Graftek and a '95 Paradox [made by Giant]).

I found a "can't lose" deal on a new 2011 SuperSix Hi-Mod and built it up with the components from the Vortex. The frame is extremely stiff laterally. No matter how hard I push it, there is not even a hint of lateral flex. The result is a bike that holds a line no matter what; rough roads and sloppy sprinting have no effect, it just stays on track. The handling behavior is best described as “no drama” or “imperturbable”. Lean into a corner and it carves a smooth turn. Change the line? No problem. I like it.

The downside is that the vertical stiffness is also very high, producing a ride that’s harsh over rough surfaces. This is especially true in the front end. Although minor road buzz is muted, anything more substantial is communicated to the rider very clearly. Based on reviews I'd seen, I expected better.

Enter the 585. I had read and heard a lot of good things about Look bikes in general and particularly that they offered a great blend of stiffness and comfort. A local Pinarello dealer raved about a 585 he once owned, saying it was so smooth that he thought it was soft until he until he uncorked a sprint and couldn't stop smiling (sprinting is his forte). I was really interested in a 586 and narrowly missed a few on Ebay. As luck would have it, I stumbled onto a great deal on a lightly used 585 frameset recently ($586 shipped, which somehow seems like a good omen). I built it up with the components from the Lemond and just finished my first two rides on it this weekend. 

The ride is everything I had been led to believe. It damps road buzz and moderate surface roughness very well, at both ends of the bike (Nice!). While there was no obvious flex in the frame on the first steep hill I climbed, it doesn’t _feel _exceedingly stiff, like the SuperSix. The revelation came on a hard, fast hill sprint, where the actual stiffness of the frame became apparent; it tracked perfectly and never felt the slightest bit mushy or squirrely, which was a problem with the Ti bikes. The handling is more responsive than the SuperSix, but still solid and stable. Overall, I'm very favorably impressed. :thumbsup:

I plan to put miles on both bikes this season, but based on what I've seen so far, it's quite possible that the SuperSix will be sold and replaced with another Look, though I'm not sure which model. The 695 is one sweet-looking ride, but at that price, there may be another 585 in my future.:wink5:


----------



## balatoe (Apr 15, 2009)

There is not much weight difference between the two. I think the difference is like 50 grams. 

The front end on the 586 is stiffer than the 585. The BB on the 586 is also stiffer than the 585. IMO, both frames perform well. However, the 586 performs better on hills climbs.


----------



## maxxevv (Jan 18, 2009)

balatoe said:


> There is not much weight difference between the two. I think the difference is like 50 grams.
> 
> The front end on the 586 is stiffer than the 585. The BB on the 586 is also stiffer than the 585. IMO, both frames perform well. However, the 586 performs better on hills climbs.


Do note that the geometry between the 585 and 586 is slightly different.


----------

