# Scott CR1 Pro Ultegra Vs. Orbea Opal Ultegra



## BDRoad (Nov 21, 2006)

I am having trouble deciding between the Scott CR1 Pro Ultegra and Orbea Opal Ultegra. The bikes I am trying are the 2006 models with similar Ultegra builds and Mavic Ksyrium wheels. The Orbea has carbon SFA cranks and Kysirium Race wheels, while the Opal has Ultegra cranks and Elite Ksyrium wheels. I like the way they both ride and the sale prices are similarly attractive ($2,699 vs $2,499). 

I do mostly shorter 2-3 hr rides on hilly terrain so I really like the stiffness and responsiveness of the CR1. The Opal seems to have a bit more give on rough surfaces but is not as responsive. I weigh around 195 lbs and have a stocky build. Given the way I ride and my weight, the CR1 seems like it might be a better fit, but I wonder if it will be too stiff on longer rides. 

The other difficulty I am having is with the sizes of the two brands. I am 5’-10.5” (179 cm) and my inseam is 33.2" (84.4 cm). Scott’s sizing charts (see attached height sheet) show that I should probably be on their Large 56 cm bike, although I could go with the 54 cm. The Large 56 cm felt really good and my shop got the bike pretty well dialed in by lowering the stem by 1-2 cm and after setting the seat height according to my current bike (sadle top to pedal center = 90.3 cm). 

The Orbea 57 cm on the other hand felt (and looked) too big so I focused on the Medium 54 cm frame. The shop was again able to dial in the correct fit by changing the stem angle and length to a good height differential and achieve 81 cm from saddle tail to stem. The Medium Opal felt pretty damn good but I still have this nagging feeling that it is just a touch small for me, and that it could be a little too compliant given my weight. 

I talked to a guy at Orbea USA who is around my height (5'-11") and he rides a 54 cm Opal - he said that the Orbea's run larger then the sizes indicate: they seem to measure from the bottom bracket to the effective top tube at 90 degrees to the ground, making a 54 more like a 55 the way other manufacturers measure size. (see attached Orbea chart).

I am leaning towards the Scott because the reviews are so amazing and the ride felt so prices and the accelerations so immediate.

Thanks for any advice you can give. I've never spent this much on a road bike so I am giveing this a lot of thought before I pull the trigger.


----------



## altheg (Apr 10, 2006)

I was in a similar situation as you about 2 months ago, except I was comparing the SL or team issue frame against the Opal and Orca. The SL/Team Issue frame is a little lighter than the Pro frame because it uses high modulus carbon. My impression was that the SL and Opal rides was quite simular while the Orca frame was not nearly as stiff. I did think the SL was more reposiveness to acceleration. I am about 5'9" 190lbs, and rode the 54cm frame in all models, which fit me rather well. I think your choice would be between the 56cm Scott or 54cm Opal. They say you should buy the bike that fits you the best. I ended up getting the Team Issue becuase I got a good deal and really liked the Campy Record group.

For your choice (not considering fit) I would much rather have the Opal (one of the best looking frames IMO and excellent warranty). Some dealers will upgrade to better level Ksyrium wheels for a couple hundred $. I can't remember the original LBS selling prices, but it seems to me that the Opal is a higher discount.


----------



## BDRoad (Nov 21, 2006)

*Thanks for the input...*

This is a tough one. 

The Opal is a beautiful frame and the lifetime warrantly is great. 

The CR1 gets so many great reviews and delivers just a bit more accuracy and acceleration.


----------



## rollinrob (Dec 8, 2002)

The scott does not have a replaceable rear derailluer hanger and the warrenty is only 5 years..


----------



## BDRoad (Nov 21, 2006)

*I decided to go with the Orbea Opal....*

It turned out to be a really good size for me and the $1,000 off list made it a really attractive deal.

The lifetime warranty and replacable rear derailluer hanger were a factor for sure. The Scott CR1 only had a 3 year warrantly actually - two different shops told me this, althought a Scott rep I talked to said he though 5 years was standard on the 2006.

I am sure the Scott would have been a great bike as well. Thanks for all the advice.


----------



## rollinrob (Dec 8, 2002)

Great Choice, I have an red 06 opal and really like it. I think it is one of the best looking bikes out thier but I am very biased. It is a very stiff frame and it fits like a glove. What color did you get. Be sure to post pics in the Orbea forum when you get it.


----------

