# colnago handling



## steel515 (Sep 6, 2004)

I read "Colnagos are very much an anomally in the racing bike market, having rather shallow head angles compared to other race frames. In addition, Colnago takes a one size fits all approach to fork sizing, using a 43mm fork rake on bikes with head angles ranging from 71deg. to 74deg. Of course, this keeps manufacturing costs down, but doesn't optimize handling."

Is this true? This doesn't sound very good.


----------



## icsloppl (Aug 25, 2009)

Where did you read that?


----------



## jackblack (Feb 1, 2007)

My nag rails. It is a 54. Not sure about other sizes. Best handeling bike that I have ridden.


----------



## Gnarly 928 (Nov 19, 2005)

My CX 1 outhandles almost every bike I have ever owned. Best all around bike I have ever owned.


----------



## FrenchNago (Jan 1, 2011)

same for my c50 strada it outperforms all other bikes i've tried , BMC, Lynskey, Merlin, Cervelo to name a few


----------



## ciclisto (Nov 8, 2005)

*Ernesto rules*

You know it irks me that alot of times guys just rag on Colnago...most is BS and unjustified. These are great bikes. I have tried almost everything except a Pinarello (too weird looking) and these bikes are the best made, well painted, hold up great, keep their value, are desirable, and ride great, handle great and are made in the smallest increments to fit you like a glove. I have two and am getting a third..Does jealousy come to mind? what else about this situation. someone has to be top dog it is "COLNAGO" when you take it all in- longevity, serious maker, trophies innovation, no one compares really and over 59 years to boot . yes you can find a fault and hang you hat on that... like finding the pimple on the Sports ILLustrated model and then say I wouldn't give her the time of day... yeah right! "From now on you have to own one and ride it for a year to comment!....Obama" State Speech czar


----------



## Herkwo (Nov 8, 2002)

Not sure where the OP is getting the info and will have to agree w/ ciclisto... Anyways, here is my two cents on the matter. I've only owned my Colnago for a short time but it is the best handling bike I've ridden bar none (and I've owned several and test ridden a bunch).
It's hard to find Colnago Headtube angles in the geometries of late so what I present below may be a bit dated as it comes from a 2004 C40 Geometry which likely differs from the current Colnago offerings (OK, caveats done).
Here are some comparisons:

Colnago C40	
Size - Head Tube Angle

50 - 70.9
52 - 71.1
54 - 71.5
56 - 71.9
58 - 72.2
60 - 73.3

Scott Addict	
Size - Head Tube Angle

XXS - 70.5
XS - 71
S - 72
M - 73
L - 73
XL - 73.3

Cervélo RS	
Size - Head Tube Angle

XS (48) - 72
51 - 71
54 - 72
56 - 73
58 - 73
61 - 73

BMC Team Machine SLR01	
Size - Head Tube Angle

47 - 71.5
50 - 72
53 - 72.5
55 - 72.5
57 - 72.5
60 - 72.5

Bianchi Oltre	
Size - Head Tube Angle

50 - 71.5
53 - 72
55 - 72.5
57 - 73
59 - 73
61 - 73.5

Orbea Orca	
Size - Head Tube Angle

48 - 71.5
51 - 72.1
53 - 72.1
55 - 73.5
57 - 73.2
60 - 73.5

Pinarello KOBH	
Size - Head Tube Angle

48 - 71
51.5 - 73
54 - 73
56 - 73
57 - 73
58 - 72.5

From good ole Sheldon: "In general, bicycles with shallower, "slack", "relaxed" angles (lower numbers) tend to be more stable and comfortable. Bicycles with steeper, more upright angles (higher numbers) tend to be manuverable, but less comfortable on rough surfaces."
Here is a synopsis taken from a Pezcyclingnews article comparing the C40 (w/ a slack headtube angle of 71.1 degrees) against a Pinarello Prince (w/ a 74 deg headtube angle): Handling is basically a product of Geometry (of which, head tube angle is only ONE component) and those that offer larger head angles and the Colnagos which offer a more laid back (less head tube angle). The difference is handling: One swoops and one dives into corners, and those with higher headtube angles are simply quicker (more twitchy), the Colnagos are a little more stable. 
If you are a Barn storming great bike handler, take the one with the greater head tube angle... If you are the smooth, choose your line type... take the Colnago. Note that both styles of these bikes will let you do what you need and handle well. It's just that the Colnago will be a little more forgiving if you get twitchy...
Bottomline: I'll be keeping my Colnago.


----------



## pablotn (Oct 11, 2008)

Perhaps the OP can direct this questions to the hundreds, if not thousands of Pro level cyclists and team management who have consistently won on Colnagos in the last half century. Maybe they can chime in as to how much an anomoly Colnago geometry is, and the suspicious handling characteristics.

In my short and humble life I have yet to read anything related to this story that was published, which by the way has yet to be linked here.

If the OP did not have over a thousand posts already I would almost think troll.


----------



## kbwh (May 28, 2010)

Found a source for the quote in the OP:
http://www.bikeforums.net/archive/index.php/t-46292.html

As Herkwo posted, the Colnago HTAs are shallow but not hysterically so. The claim of one fork rake for all sizes is difficult to check, since Colnago does not cite HTA and Fork rake in their geometry charts.

We'll keep my wife's Colnago too.


----------



## nicensleazy (Aug 3, 2008)

The proof is in the pudding my friend....ride a Colnago and you won't look back.....that I can assure you! Go down to your nearest dealer/agent and take one for a spin if possible.


----------



## pablotn (Oct 11, 2008)

lol, from 7 years ago....by obviously a person who is the foremost authority on bike geometry and frame building. :idea:


----------

