# 585/Scott CR1 comparo impressions



## Gnarly 928 (Nov 19, 2005)

I have both now, just spending the past week getting acquainted with the Scott after riding my Look 585 over 10,000 miles since last Aug. Here's some subjective thoughts on how the two compare.

The Scott is more "rigid". Now I'll explain how I mean that. Stiffness is a quality that there should be a way to quantify, but there's not, so I am using "rigid". The best test/comparo just came yesterday when I rode a loop on the Scott that I ride quite often, a route with 3000' of elevation gain over 'european-style' paved Forest service roads. Small, rolly, some potholes and not built to any DOT specs. The climb is over about 10 miles, the descent down another road, much more sustained grade..and fast!

Well, the 585 takes the descent, hands down! The Look simply works, with much less "Pucker-Factor" when going balls-out on uneven pavment and around hairpins or on wet dirty pavment where you sometimes have to unexpecdedly change lines or speed. No fuss, no scary moments. Not quite so with the CR1. While it is capable of equal speeds, subjectivly...It requires strict attention at all times, period! No relaxing, no "wool gathering" no water bottles out at 40mph...Very very judicious use of the brakes (I used the same brakes and rims on both bikes for this hill) and undulations in the pavment surface require constant rider input..Pavment defects, like holes or cracks, they come with such a "Hit!" that I stopped once to check and make sure I hadn't broken a wheel or the frame! "Rigid" is the right word..Maybe "un-compliant" or "un-forgiving"...

Now climbing..Perhaps the CR1 has a slight advantage here..perhaps. That is very hard to know for sure, since so much depends on the rider when going slowly up a very steep climb..(a few 14%-Garman-pitches on this hill) Out of the saddle, the Scott feels a little more rigid, seated (which is how I do most of my climbing) you can't feel much difference, unless you hit a hole...again, then the Scott 'spanks you" harder than the 585..

Finish? Look takes this by a mile. The Scott I have is pretty garish, what with chrome graphics and this huge weave carbon layup highlighted by a shiny clearcoat..Right down the center of the top tube is a prominent seam, also..and a big chrome decal that tells me the frame has "SDS" 'Shock Dampening System"...Yeah, right. Also the dropouts are kinda cheesy cast aluminum and the rear der. hanger is bonded into the frame as an integral part of the rear dropout.

The head set is better on the Scott, but the headtube is quite long..anyone wanting extra low bars will do so with a radical angle stem.

Overall, the Scott rides a lot like my Time frame used to ride...Which is, nice, but with some quirks. Dunno yet about the customer service...it would certainly not stack up to what I've had from the Look boys...I am betting..

So, time to go ride..and for today's club hammer fest..I choose to take the _______. ? Hard choice...
Don Hanson


----------



## uscsig51 (May 7, 2006)

*Why Scott?*

Why would you add a Scott (assuming CR1) if you already have a 585? Why not go with a 595 or 595 Ultra if looking for stiffness?


----------



## Gnarly 928 (Nov 19, 2005)

*Good question.*



uscsig51 said:


> Why would you add a Scott (assuming CR1) if you already have a 585? Why not go with a 595 or 595 Ultra if looking for stiffness?


 A couple of reasons that might not make much sense to a Look fanatic. While I love my 585 and rate it as the best bike I have owned so far, I like messing with different ones, kinda a hobby of mine.

1. The 595, with it's odd-ball 'seat mast' simply doesn't appeal to me. Purely a personal opinion, but if I was to spend that kinda money for a frame, it would be one that really floated my boat, and the 595 is not that one..

2. Some of my teammates and people I've raced against really swear by their CR1s, so when this one came along for just over a grand, in 'as new' condition, I thought I would give it a try. It'll be a long while before I'd find a 595 or an Ultra 595 for that kinda dough, and would it be worth the big bucks to use as a racer?

When I travel, to race, the bikes can take a beating..I'd hate to feel like I was beating up a valuable bike..I'd rather concentrate on beating up on my opponents..
BTW. This past week was a big NRC stage race here and one of the Cat 2s rode past on a 595 with a missing seat! Dunno why..Who needs problems like that? Coulda been a 'fluke', but he was the only saddle-less rider who passed that day. When it comes time to sell a 595, I would think your potential customers would be fewer than with a normal frame.

I guess this CR1 is going to be a good race bike. Probably if I had unlimited funding, I would have a new 585 Ultra to race on and maybe a 595 Ultra for crits, and the Scott for climbing...it is really really light and pretty tight uphill..But I do have to keep my bike stable within reason..

I have never ridden a 595, so one day, I certainly will. Perhap I will even get used to that seat mast dealie, (and having a saddle on a washer).

Don Hanson


----------

