# Scott CR1 Pro Ultegra versus 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 Ksyrium 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 in the Bay Area 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. This may be because I am around 195 lbs (due moslty to 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. 

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).

Any advice would be greatly appreciated. Now I can see why people pay extra for custom bikes!


----------



## kwhite01 (Mar 17, 2006)

BDRaod, you have a very similar build to me, and I purchased the Orbea Opal about 4 months ago. I went with the 57 cm frame (black and silver). The build on the bike is exactly as you described above. Ultegra cranks with the Ksyrium Elite wheels. I am 5' 11" and about 190 pounds. I dropped the stem to a 90 versus the 110 that came on the bike. That has helped a lot. I have never tried the Scott, so I can not give you any feedback on that, but I can tell you that I love the Opal. I do a lot of riding. Sometime 7 to 8 hours a day on the bike. The Opal is very smooth on the road. I too live in the Bay Area, so I know a lot of the roads in the area. I have put on over 1000 miles on the bike since I bought it. I can't say enough good things about it.


----------



## BDRoad (Nov 21, 2006)

*I ended up going with the Orbea Opal 54....*

I spoke to someone at Orbea and they felt that the 54 cm was the way to go. The 57 cm also felt good but did look a little big with only 2-3 inches of seatpost showing.

I had the bike fitted yesterday without any difficulty and it does seem to be the appropriate size. I am going to go for an initial ride shortly - hopefuly it will still feel good after and hour or two.


----------

