# cristallo v. C50



## sbrsport (Dec 26, 2005)

I am looking at both frames. I weigh about 135 so am not overly concerned with stiffness, but more with long distance comfort and descending stability. For anyone who has ridden both, I would appreciate all thoughts. Oh, the Cristallo is $1,000 cheaper, so if the C50 is better, how much better? Thanks.


----------



## Paris_Metro (Aug 7, 2006)

The C50 is going to be a plush comfy ride whereas the Cristallo is quite stiff. If by long rides you mean 100 miles and under I think the Cristallo should suit you fine. If you're doing double centuries, however, definately go with the C50. Both frames are stable and, if set up properly, should handle like a dream.


----------



## ballmon (Mar 23, 2005)

sbrsport said:


> I am looking at both frames. I weigh about 135 so am not overly concerned with stiffness, but more with long distance comfort and descending stability. For anyone who has ridden both, I would appreciate all thoughts. Oh, the Cristallo is $1,000 cheaper, so if the C50 is better, how much better? Thanks.



Way better I'd say, the C-50 is the only real choice.


----------



## sbrsport (Dec 26, 2005)

Ballmon: Just curious. Have you ridden both? When you say "way better," in what way? Thanks for any info.


----------



## ballmon (Mar 23, 2005)

sbrsport said:


> Ballmon: Just curious. Have you ridden both? When you say "way better," in what way? Thanks for any info.



Yes, I've ridden both. In my opinion, the C-50, while stiff, offers the most incredible plush ride of any bike avalible in the market. Incredible vibration damping. The Crisallo, not so much!!


----------



## sbrsport (Dec 26, 2005)

thanks for the info. How do you compare the handling of the two (especially descending)? I know its dumb, but I really like one of the paint jobs on the Cristallo that is not offered on the C50. Also, it is more than $500 cheaper.


----------



## ballmon (Mar 23, 2005)

The C-50 never gets nervous at any speed and I've had mine over 50 mph. Rock solid!!


----------



## Pizza Man (Oct 25, 2006)

*What about the Extreme C?*

I am also about 135 pounds & I've been considering the C50, Cristallo & Extreme C. 

Does anyone have any comments about the ride of the Extreme C?

Is it true that it only has screws for 1 H2O bottle? That wouldn't work for me.

Thanks,

PM


----------



## ballmon (Mar 23, 2005)

Pizza Man said:


> I am also about 135 pounds & I've been considering the C50, Cristallo & Extreme C.
> 
> Does anyone have any comments about the ride of the Extreme C?
> 
> ...


At 135, the Extreme C was built just for you. Bad news is that it's got mounting hardware for just one bottle.


----------



## gibson00 (Aug 7, 2006)

I concur with what others have said about the C50. I finally got a couple of 2 hour rides in on my C50. WOW, what a difference in feel compared to my Cannondale Six13. My first thought was that this must be what a comfy touring bike feels like!!! Rock steady, and like a magic carpet ride, and thas on clinchers at 115-120 psi (Vittoria EVO CX's on Shimano 7801 SL's).
If you like the twitchy/fast handling racing bike feel, you may in fact not like the C50. It is that smooth.


----------



## boonen (Mar 24, 2005)

ballmon said:


> At 135, the Extreme C was built just for you. Bad news is that it's got mounting hardware for just one bottle.


This is not true. Although there are models out there with only one bottle cage mount, most have two. (only the very first models had only one standard, now you have to specify it if you only want one cage, I guess Colnago realized that most people do want to be able to carry two cages)

Here is an example of one with two cages: http://fairwheelbikes.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1022


----------

