# I got to ride a look 566 today



## Americano (Dec 20, 2001)

Since getting crunched last week I've been looking hard at getting a new frame to replace my bent Cinelli.

I've kinda settled on the $2000 price point and have been very intrigued by the new relaxed geometries of the Specialized Roubaix Pro SL and the Look 566. The new 566 frame is really a nice looking bike, extremely high tech with all of the advanced curves and shapes of the tubes. The top tube is incredibly flat and thin, and the bend at the top looks pretty good when seen in real life. As a matter of fact the whole bike looks much better than what is pictured on Look's web site. 

My old Cinelli is an old school traditional racing frame and it felt very very strange to be so upright on these new relaxed geometry frames. Everything felt much more normal when I took the Tarmac Pro SL for a test ride. But I'm not a racer anymore so it seems that I should try to force myself to get used to these new sporty frames. Well at least I've kinda convinced myself to go with the relaxed frame instead of something that feels more like what I'm used to in the Tarmac. 

The Look 566 that I rode today was the entry level bike configured with SRAM Rival components. I don't know what the weight was, but I'm guessing it was around 17lbs with pedals. The ride on the 566 was pretty short, only about 10 min and the road wasn't too rough, though it did feel like there was a reasonable amount of vibration damping from this high tech frame. 

The biggest con of this bike (in comparison to the Roubaix Pro SL) is that it just didn't seem to accelerate very quickly. Its really hard to tell if the problem was only the weight difference, or if the may have been some unwanted flex in the BB and chainstays. I realize that its not a fair comparison noting the differences of a $2500 bike and a $5000 bike like the Roubaix Pro. But both frames sell at the same price point and I'm likely to install a Chorus group on whichever one I decide to get. 

The 566 was equipped with Fulcrum Racing 7 wheels which weigh in aroung 1850 grams while the Roubaix had Roval Roubaix wheels which come in at around 1586 grams. That alone could possibly account for the differences in how one bike accelerated vs the other. I plan on going with a set of Campy Eurus 2-way fit wheels (which are comparable to the Roval wheels).

It will be pretty difficult for me to make a decision between the two frames considering I can't compare them with equal components. As it stands right now I like the way that the Look 566 looks better than the Roubaix Pro SL. However the Roubaix has a better warranty (lifetime vs 5 years) and in my admittedly unfair comparison seems to accelerate better.

If anyone has any other ideas about why one frame is a better choice than the other I'd love to hear it.

Derek


----------



## oily666 (Apr 7, 2007)

Did you ride them back to back? Which did you ride first? The wheels _could_ make a difference but as for BB flex in a 566, I'd have to refer you to Thor Hushovd. Try a 585 Optimum (with better components).


----------



## funknuggets (Feb 4, 2004)

Lighter wheels = better acceleration.

BB flex? One of the most grossly overused and useless stats out there. People dont know what to say about a frame and want to seem like they know what they are talking about so they start chiding a frame on flex. Then they report on it, then some newbie that doesn't know what they are talking about poo poos a bike because somebody said it has flex, so the newb gets on there and THINKS they are feeling flex, but thats wrong.

We could argue all day about flex and whether the energy used in flex is returned to the rider as it "FLEXES back" OR... whether or not shaped carbon bikes flex much at all in comparison to steel or other bikes in the 70's or 80's. 

So honestly dude... either it flexed or didn't. Dont say it 'may' have... otherwise you are just providing an otherwise useless and unsubstantiated information on a bike that may be perfectly good for someone else. Try stats that you do know. Saying that it FEELS faster is fine. Put the same wheels on both... and repeat. Do you get the same result? 

The Look is a perfectly capable bike.


----------



## Americano (Dec 20, 2001)

*I rode the Roubaix first*

I rode the Roubaix last Sunday, and the 566 today.

When I think about it now the 566 did just seem kinda sluggish. I haven't been on my cinelli since last thursday, but when I think about it, I think that my steel 18 lb cinelli felt like it was accelerating faster also. But on that bike I had sub 1600 gram wheels (eurus) and tubeless tires.

It really is hard to tell with the rides being separated by days and all. The one thing I do know for sure is that the Roubaix and Tarmac Pro SL bikes really did feel lighter than anything I've ever been on before. Last sunday was the first time I had ever ridden a carbon frame.



oily666 said:



> Did you ride them back to back? Which did you ride first? The wheels _could_ make a difference but as for BB flex in a 566, I'd have to refer you to Thor Hushovd. Try a 585 Optimum (with better components).


----------



## Lance#8in09 (Sep 13, 2008)

I ride a look 595, I can't comment on the 566. But I used to ride a kg381i and a 585. Both were very nice rides, neither was too flexy. I race CAT II and my LBS owner used to ride in Europe and is a CAT I level racer. He does Sea Otter each year and other high level events. He rode a 585 for 2 years and loved it. Yet I have seen a few guys in here just from my lurking, post about the 585 being too flexy. I don't know what level of riders they are, but I'm pretty confident they do not have more wattage than my CAT I class LBS owner who never had a flex issue with the 585. I think frame flex gets a lot more play in chatrooms than what it really bears in real life. Look does pretty serious R&D and their entry level frame from a performance standpoint would be equal to or better than most other makers top end bikes. If the 566 is at all similiar to the 585 I'd race that bike over any steel, aluminum or ti frame out there and most makers carbon frames out there. Looks are topnotch. They are light, stiff where they need to be and just very well designed bikes.


----------



## climbandcycle (Nov 4, 2004)

The 555/566 and 585/595 are not in the same class. I have a 585 team and have no issues with flex and I make 17.5w/kg for 5 sec (83kgs). The 555/566 are marketing bikes, they look cool- but that is about it. Look uses the prestige of the higher-end models to sell the budget bikes. I read a great review that someone who owned both had wrote but I can't seem to find it ( to summarize, they did not like the cheaper model, it felt wooden, like a cheap carbon frame). Here is a little info http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/first-look-look-2009-road-bikes-17832 . Look makes great racing bikes, not great entry level bikes. Take a harder look at the Spec. they generally make great bikes at all price points.


----------



## NealH (May 2, 2004)

I agree with climbandcycle. 

Unless you are willing to add the 585/595 to the candidate list, my recommendation is to go with the Roubaix - or whichever bike your first impression favors. Actually, I would always recommend the bike that worked the best, not looked the best.


----------



## phoehn9111 (May 11, 2005)

Even though BB flex probably doesn't have a significant affect on translation
of pedal force to forward motion, from personal experience I prefer a stiff
BB for the possible handling\confidence inspiring factor. I went from an
aluminum noodle to a TCR Advanced and would not skimp on BB stiffness.


----------



## maximum7 (Apr 24, 2008)

> The 555/566 and 585/595 are not in the same class.


I should hope not as a complete 555/566 is that price of a 585/595 frame.

Here's a quote from Road Bike Action Mag.
http://roadbikeaction.com/fly.aspx?layout=content&taxid=66&cid=130

"We spent a lot of time on the 555. At first it didn’t jump out at us as a Look frame usually does. The feel was solid, comfortable, nimble and adept, but it wasn’t until we put more miles on the 555 that we began to understand its best qualities. The Look 555 is a very comfortable bike that keeps you riding for miles and miles and almost gets better as the day goes on. It is a solid handler and descender, not an innate climber, but fine on long hills and capable on rollers, and solid in a frenetic sprint situation. The Look 555 does exactly what Look intended it to do and does so with an attitude-inspiring design, construction and heritage. There was some grumbling in the RBA offices when this feature was suggested. Lower-end bikes from the most famous builders in the world? Why not get their most expensive models to review? That’s what people want to see. Well, the Look 555 proves our point and justifies this feature. For under $3000 you can get the benefit, testing, history and panache of a Look bicycle that holds true to its revered name."





.


----------



## Americano (Dec 20, 2001)

*I'll be doing a better test this weekend.*

My Specialized dealer is going to let me borrow a Roubaix for 24hrs. I plan on doing a full ride with some real climbing on it. And then bringing it by to the other shop that has the 566 and riding them with the same wheels.

There will still be a difference in overall weight between the two bikes but having the same wheelset should go a long ways to making a more even playing field.

I hadn't really considered the 585 because the frame alone is $3000. However I got my estimate for the repairs to my bike and it came to $4150, which actually is enough to get the 585 Optimum (which is absolutely gorgeous), but I would still have to come up with more money of my own to completely outfit the bike with the same Chorus components and buying a new Eurus rear wheel. Even though that sounds tempting, I'm probably not going to go that route (unless they give me some extra money for pain and suffering).

As it stands right now I'm leaning towards the Roubaix frame. The biggest problem with the Looks (aside from the possible sluggishness of the 566) is that the warranty isn't as comprehensive as Specialized's.



NealH said:


> I agree with climbandcycle.
> 
> Unless you are willing to add the 585/595 to the candidate list, my recommendation is to go with the Roubaix - or whichever bike your first impression favors. Actually, I would always recommend the bike that worked the best, not looked the best.


----------



## castrello (Apr 18, 2002)

You keep repeating the word sluggish so many time that I guess soon it will become true.

It´s probably in the wheels. A couple of years ago a friend of mine and I switched wheels on a training ride. His wheels were first generation fulcrum fives and mine were ksyrium sls. A 300 gram difference. The wheel change transformed my bike from a super-quick crit-type machine to a sluggish train. So yeah, it´s probably in the wheels.


----------



## oily666 (Apr 7, 2007)

Don't get too hung up on warranties. Remember, the bold print givith and the fine print taketh away. I weigh 170 pounds and have a Look 361 (Taiwan frame) with 25K+ miles on it. As far as I can tell there's been no change. Not even a hairline crack in the finish which happens with many _higher end _carbon frames. 

Bikes can be like stereo systems. The system that blew you away in the store can drive you out of your music room a month later. Maximum7 gave you some good advice. It's how the bike feels over the long haul and the subtle things the bike does that you never notice unless you're focussed on it at the moment. I also have a 481 SL that feels like my friend's Cervello R3 and IMO has superior build quality and finish. The first time I rode it I was dazzled. Now I'm used to all the things it does well and don't even notice them but, I've never felt more confident on a bike in 35 years on the road.

Check the reviews. The 585 recieved a citation from RBR for the number of five star reviews it got and is still getting. Also, check out the Look Forum in RBR and also note how many posts it has. And it's monitored by Look's top customer service guy, Chas. We're a rabid bunch.


----------



## acid_rider (Nov 23, 2004)

imo

i am inclined to think it's the wheels, not the frame. i also believe best value in Look or another "like" brand is to pick their low-mid spec frame, it will be 90% as good as their top end frame but 50% cheaper. The "flex" is not an issue unless you weigh a tonne or can put out the power of elite rider. 
What will be far more important is the "fit" of a frame for your body. If Roubaix fits better go with that. If you feel more comfortable on Roubaix then buy it but dont waste time on things you cant measure accurately like "flex" because I think there is none to make any real difference on the road. Stay upright. 8^)


----------



## chas (Aug 10, 2006)

climbandcycle said:


> The 555/566 and 585/595 are not in the same class. I have a 585 team and have no issues with flex and I make 17.5w/kg for 5 sec (83kgs). The 555/566 are marketing bikes, they look cool- but that is about it.


There's no doubt that Specialized is making some great bikes right now, so I'm not going to try to talk you out of one, but I'd just like to say that the 555 and the 566 are VERY different bikes. The 2007 555 was our first entry in the "budget" full carbon market. It is a nice frame that was relatively successful for us, but the $3000 complete bike price point is very competitive, and I don't think the 555 represented LOOK's full capabilities. So we decided to move forward with a new frameset - the 566.

Pricepoint is about the only thing the 555 and 566 have in common. The 566 is lighter, sexier, and rides better. We have one here built up with a pair of Ksyrium ES's and it's under someone's butt on nearly every lunch ride. I think that says something considering the selection of bikes we have here to choose from. 

I'm really excited about the 566 this year. After spending quite a bit of time riding one, I can tell you that it's "LOOK"-ness is more than skin deep.

*[email protected]*


----------



## Daverino (Jun 27, 2004)

climbandcycle said:


> Look makes great racing bikes, not great entry level bikes.


This is one of the dumbest things I've read on the internet in a while.


----------



## maximum7 (Apr 24, 2008)

So did you get to ride them? 
Thoughts?


----------



## Americano (Dec 20, 2001)

*No not back to back*

Unfortunately my Specialized dealer had already lent out the demo bike for the weekend. Hopefully I'll be able to get another chance this week.

I did however go back to the Look dealer and ask for another test ride with a lighter wheelset. On this test ride I swapped in a set of Ksyrium SL premiums. These wheels should have been lighter than the Roval Roubaix wheels that were on the Specialized bike I rode the week before.

In all honesty the 566 didn't feel much different than it had when I had ridden it earlier in the week. There were several days in between the rides so its difficult to compare. I do know that I felt surprised about the lightness and how quick they felt when I rode the Roubaix and Tarmac the week before. I didn't get that from the 566. 

Maybe I was just feeling extra strong that day I rode the Specialized bikes? Or maybe there is some actual difference that I can't put my finger on. I won't even bother to venture a guess as to what that might be given how some people around here seem to take a guess of a possible shortcoming in the Look frame as if I've insulted their mother.


----------



## centurionomega (Jan 12, 2005)

I don't have a lot of experience with "high end" carbon frames, but I just finished building up my Look 555 about 600 miles ago and I would like to say that it is the best bicycle that I have ever owned. I am not a racer, but I don't just sit and pedal when I am out for a bike ride either.

Living in San Francisco/Bay Area means every ride has many climbs and descents, and my 555 performs very well. On climbs I just stand up and go. I am not sure what "flex in the bottom bracket" is anyway. I don't even have to shift out of the big chain ring. Descents are crisp and fast. The bike handles almost too well; it encourages high speed.

One thing that did take some time to dial in was the upright riding posture. Sometimes I felt like I was on a mountain bike until I chopped the steerer some more to get a more aggressive posture.

If you start with a frame/fork, and buy all of the components for a custom build, maybe you can lose the slow acceleration feeling. Or just go with the Specialized because they also make excellent bicycles (my '93 Rockhopper is still performing flawlessly).


----------



## C-40 (Feb 4, 2004)

*thoughts...*

The 566 is geared toward recreational riders, where a more compliant ride is usually desired. It's not supposed to be a stiff racing frame and neither is the Roubaix. I never put much value in brief test rides myself. You not only need the same wheels, but also tires, tire pressure, saddle and some amount of fit adjustment, or your impressions will be skewed.

I've usually taken a leap of faith and bought frames untested. I haven't test ridden a bike since 1992. I bought a C'dale 2.8 that year (after a test ride) and it now holds a place on my list of most brutal frames you could buy. Others include a '98 Litespeed Ultimate and a 51cm Cervelo R3. I decided after 200 miles to sell the R3 frame. Crappy geometry and ride.

I've owned four look frames - KG381, KG461, 585 origin and 585 Ultra. I've still got the last three. The KG461 is a lower level frame and has a bit more compliant ride than the any of the others, but it is in no way disappointing.

If you really want a racier ride, look for a closeout price of around $2K on a 585. That's what I paid for my Ultra frame. Now there is a stiff frame.


----------



## Lance#8in09 (Sep 13, 2008)

climbandcycle said:


> The 555/566 and 585/595 are not in the same class. I have a 585 team and have no issues with flex and I make 17.5w/kg for 5 sec (83kgs). The 555/566 are marketing bikes, they look cool- but that is about it. Look uses the prestige of the higher-end models to sell the budget bikes. I read a great review that someone who owned both had wrote but I can't seem to find it ( to summarize, they did not like the cheaper model, it felt wooden, like a cheap carbon frame). Here is a little info http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/first-look-look-2009-road-bikes-17832 . Look makes great racing bikes, not great entry level bikes. Take a harder look at the Spec. they generally make great bikes at all price points.


And you know this for fact because you designed the 566?

You spent significant time riding the 566?

" Look makes great racing bikes, not great entry level bikes."

Agree with the other poster, this has to be one of the stupidest statements I have ever heard. Making great race bikes prevents one from making a great entry level bike? Why? Have you actually ridden a 566? If you have not ridden it how do you know how the bike rides? How much saddle time do you have on a 566, be honest? Zero?

Just plain stupid.


----------



## AlexCad5 (Jan 2, 2005)

Fit/set up is most likely the culprit. If the bars are too high, the stem to long or short, or your weight too far forward or aft, it will effect the handling of the bike.
That said, go with the bike that sings to you.


----------



## TheChief (Jul 31, 2008)

*Look 566 is the best choice in the less than $2600 range in 2009, period*

I faced the exact same decisions between the 09 566 and 09 Roubaix and have ridden both bikes extensively. They are both beautiful bikes with very similar characteristics, shorter top-tube, longer head tube, semi relaxed sloping geometry that is good for all riding conditions including the periodic race. It not a true racing bike so all those who chimed in with 585 comments and such are not in your market, or maybe just posing.

Regardless of the choice will you be happy either bike, and the design and paint upgrades on the 2009 Roubaix made the decision more difficult.

I choose the 566 for the following reasons:
1) Price tag, the 566 with the awesomely updated 2009 SRAM Rival is $200 less than the Robaiux with lack-luster 105 components. Add Ultergra SL to the Roubaix and there is more than a $600 difference.
2) Steez, Both bikes are great looking and updated for 2009 but the Look is a Look and I see Roubaixs everyday. Maybe it is vain but I like to have something a bit different, same reason I didn't buy the Trek 5.2. Look 566 has a nice little pin-stripe on the top tube that finishes it off nice.
3) SRAM Rival! If you haven't read the Bicycling magazines December issue review of SRAM Rival, do it. I was skeptical at first but simply love the double-tap shifting, light weight, black powder coat, and exact shift of the SRAM components. By brother is a Dura-Ace fiend and said he likes the shifting of SRAM as good as or better than DA. I was shocked.
4) FSA Ergo-aero carbon bars are really nice and comfy and an upgrade from the Specialized Bar.
5) Fulcrum 7s, these wheel are generic as this get and are not light, but are somewhat aero and are extremely strong and stiff on corners. Good training wheel. 
6) Crankset is not compact (39/53) with 12/25 on the cassette. This is a personal choice but is working out great.
7) Look seems to jump out faster in the sprint and the bottom bracket is beefy, overall handling was more comfortable for me and I feel as I can really lay into the corners.

Not everything is perfect on the Look though
1a) Geometry sizes are limited. If you are over 6' 2'' or really small you might not fit.
1) Fulcrum 7s, if you have fun out of the saddle you will want to upgrade.
2) Tires, the Equinoxs are a good tire but the bike was shipped with the very heavy steel beaded version of the tire that exacerbates the heaviness of the Fulcrums.
3) Aero, the rear triangle has twisted stay for compliance and I appreciate the compliance but the top half of the stay has a lot of surface area that is exposed to the wind and wheel turbulence. There is an aero penalty there.
4) The included Ponza saddle not uncomfortable but was well.. pretty cheap. I swapped out right away.

Here are some pictures I posted in the Look forum; who wouldn't want to ride that!

http://forums.roadbikereview.com/showthread.php?p=1908471#post1908471

If you have any questions feel free to ask.

The Chief out!


----------



## Americano (Dec 20, 2001)

*Chief, your bike looks great!*

Hi Chief,

Your 566 pix in the other post look great. The 566 is definitely the best looking of all the frames I've been considering. However, it is no longer on my list, for 2 reasons:
1. The 566 just didn't seem to accelerate as quickly as the Roubaix Pro. I rode both bikes several times and for me I just didn't get as good a feeling with the 566.

2. The Specialized warranty is very much superior in that it guards against cracks developing in the carbon fiber for the lifetime of the original owner. I'm now only considering carbon bikes with lifetime warranties.

So I've narrowed it down to the Roubaix Pro SL and the Cervelo RS. I still haven't been able to ride the Cervelo yet, but hope to tomorrow, and hope to finally make a decision about which frame to buy on Wednesday. The Cervelo just doesn't do it for me aesthetically, and its more expensive than the Roubaix (my LBS is offering an 09 Roubaix frame for less than $1800 through December). But the Cevelo owners are a very happy and vocal group, so I've gotta try one to see what all the fuss is about.


----------



## TheChief (Jul 31, 2008)

I looked at the Roubaix Pro SL complete and it was great but out of my price range at $4400, but the frame at $1800 is a good price, and I think that's $200 less than the 566 frame allow. Guess that is a no brainer. The Cervelo RS is interesting also, keep us posted. Either way you are in for a win/win situation.


----------



## TheChief (Jul 31, 2008)

Oh, I plan on trying the Easton EA90 Aeros (in the picture) on the bike also when the snow melts. My brother believes with the Eastons the 566 will liven up a ton on the sprints.


----------



## TheChief (Jul 31, 2008)

Another clarification since I got an email on the warranty on the Look 566, it's 5 years on the frame 1 year paint. That can be chalked up as a negative on the Look when compared to the Specialized life warranty


----------



## Lance#8in09 (Sep 13, 2008)

TheChief said:


> I faced the exact same decisions between the 09 566 and 09 Roubaix and have ridden both bikes extensively. They are both beautiful bikes with very similar characteristics, shorter top-tube, longer head tube, semi relaxed sloping geometry that is good for all riding conditions including the periodic race. It not a true racing bike so all those who chimed in with 585 comments and such are not in your market, or maybe just posing.
> 
> Regardless of the choice will you be happy either bike, and the design and paint upgrades on the 2009 Roubaix made the decision more difficult.
> 
> ...


I would have to disagree with the assertion that the 566 is not raceable or a true racing bike. The reality is that bike technology and in particular carbon fiber technology has soared over the past decade. The 566 is far more technologically advanced than the best carbon fiber frames which were being ridden in the TDF just 5-8 years ago. Its a much more advanced frame than say a Look KG 381i which CSC had no issues riding (and that wonderful frame is certainly not an overly stiff frame compared to lots of other frames out there.) It's hard to believe that someone could not race very effectively on this frame assuming the geometry works for them, and given the amount of guys who buy "race" frames and then end up using 3 cm's of spacers to get the bars where they want them it is just not credible to believe this frameset could not be raced by loads of cyclists with loads of success even in races.


----------



## maximum7 (Apr 24, 2008)

> So I've narrowed it down to the Roubaix Pro SL and the Cervelo RS


You need to get the bike that YOU like. Sure as a Look owner, I'm bummed that you've taken the 566 out of the running, but the bikes you are looking at, are all very nice.

I kinda went through the same thing. I drove 3 hours to buy my affordable "dream bike", a Pinarello 3:13, but alas it didn't fit and it was that last one. The sales guy told me to try the Look 555, which I never considered. It was so different in the way it rode and really was the better bike for me even though my heart was set on the Pin. The Pin. rode like a Cadilac, but the Look felt quick and snappy. 

I'm hoping that you like the Cervelo.  ... It's always nice to see something less common on the road.
Let us know what you decided on.


----------



## TheChief (Jul 31, 2008)

Lance#08, well said you are 100% correct. Geometry is slightly relaxed, and I get my best performance with this Geometry. I plan participating in some racing in 2009 and I am certain the bike will not hold me back at all.


----------



## C-40 (Feb 4, 2004)

*amusing...*

This lengthy thread is amusing with all the hand wringing over acceleration of a frame intended for the recreational crowd. A bunch of whimps trying to decide which whimpy bike to buy, because they can't handle a real racing frame.

You're kidding yourself if you think "lifetime" warranty is worth anything. If you haven't laid that bike down is 5 years, it proves that you're a whimp.:cryin:

Yes, I'm in one of those moods, but if a 55 year old can handle a 585 Ultra with 12cm of drop....


----------



## desmo13 (Jun 28, 2006)

C-40 said:


> This lengthy thread is amusing with all the hand wringing over acceleration of a frame intended for the recreational crowd. A bunch of whimps trying to decide which whimpy bike to buy, because they can't handle a real racing frame.
> 
> You're kidding yourself if you think "lifetime" warranty is worth anything. If you haven't laid that bike down is 5 years, it proves that you're a whimp.:cryin:
> 
> Yes, I'm in one of those moods, but if a 55 year old can handle a 585 Ultra with 12cm of drop....


the 12cm drop nothing. I can handle that. My wallet cant handle what it has to drop for a 585 Ultra.

SO I will still wimply think about this wimpy bike.


----------



## C-40 (Feb 4, 2004)

*bargains...*



desmo13 said:


> the 12cm drop nothing. I can handle that. My wallet cant handle what it has to drop for a 585 Ultra.
> 
> SO I will still wimply think about this wimpy bike.


If I bought one of those tall head tube models, I couldn't get my bars that low. I'm using a 73 degree stem and 5mm of spacer now.

There are bargains to be had if you shop around. E-bay has some decent deals. European sources can also be a lot lower, but that applies to all models.


----------



## steel515 (Sep 6, 2004)

americano, I believe u're ... responsiveness. 566 geared toward very recreational riders i think, not for you.


----------



## Americano (Dec 20, 2001)

*I ordered a Cervelo RS today*

Well I finally went with the Cervelo, they were able to come down on the price so that the difference wasn't so huge with the Roubaix frame.

Unfortunately I'll have to wait a week or 2 for the frame to arrive, maybe I'll be rollin' by xmas.


----------



## mstrongin (Mar 30, 2009)

*566 vs. Roubaix Pro*

I am also trying to decide between these two frames, and this discussion has been great, though I'm still up in the air. I'm going to switch a Campy Chorus/Centuar group from and older bike that is set up with traditional racing geometry. I'm getting to the point where I want something a bit more relaxed. I tried a built up Roubaix Pro with Ultegra, and it rode really well, but the 54 seemed a bit big and 52 a bit small. My current bike is a 53 that pretty much falls right in between these two. I then road the 566 and though it didn't feel as responsive as the Roubaix Pro, it felt like it fit better. I can get the 52 cm '09 Roubaix Pro frame on sale for $1,670 and the 53 cm 566 frame on sale until tomorrow for $1,620 . Great prices for both. I'm sure I'll be pretty happy with either one, but pulling the trigger is difficult.


----------



## lookrider (Dec 3, 2006)

Lance#8in09 said:


> I would have to disagree with the assertion that the 566 is not raceable or a true racing bike. The reality is that bike technology and in particular carbon fiber technology has soared over the past decade. The 566 is far more technologically advanced than the best carbon fiber frames which were being ridden in the TDF just 5-8 years ago. Its a much more advanced frame than say a Look KG 381i which CSC had no issues riding (and that wonderful frame is certainly not an overly stiff frame compared to lots of other frames out there.) It's hard to believe that someone could not race very effectively on this frame assuming the geometry works for them, and given the amount of guys who buy "race" frames and then end up using 3 cm's of spacers to get the bars where they want them it is just not credible to believe this frameset could not be raced by loads of cyclists with loads of success even in races.


I've got to agree 100% here. I'm riding a 381 and when someone starts talking about stiffness, I put my thumb and forefinger on the pedal at the bottom of the stroke and push the pedal perpendicular to the frame. You want to talk about flex. It doesn't matter at all. The bike rides great and you don't notice any flex which is holding you back while you're riding. This whole thing is getting somewhat ridiculous.

I ran into a young guy at the Cervelo demo on Key Biscayne about a week ago. He was riding a Trek Madone 5.2 and was complaining about something or other about stiffness. I really don't remember. I did my little demonstration with the bottom bracket and pointed out that the pros are riding his bike. It's silly really

You spend 2,3,4 thousand dollars or more on a bike, jeez, just get out and ride...


----------



## Lazyrider (Sep 15, 2004)

Go with the Cervelo if you want a more race inspired ride. The Look is a nice bike and whatever you do, PUT 2009 Sram Rival ON IT. It is by far the best and lightest groupo for the $ and yes, it works just as well as my Dura Ace. 

Build up the Cervelo RS with 09 Rival and put Easton EA90 SLs and you will likely have a 16lb complete bike. I contemplated the RS but bought a Isaac Impulse which is a super stiff, snappy bike. This is a $3k frameset that I CHOSE to put 09 Rival on with NO REGRETS. Good Luck.






Americano said:


> Hi Chief,
> 
> Your 566 pix in the other post look great. The 566 is definitely the best looking of all the frames I've been considering. However, it is no longer on my list, for 2 reasons:
> 1. The 566 just didn't seem to accelerate as quickly as the Roubaix Pro. I rode both bikes several times and for me I just didn't get as good a feeling with the 566.
> ...


----------



## nayr497 (Nov 8, 2008)

Hmm, lots of great information here. I'm looking to upgrade from an 11 year old Cannondale. Frame has always been a bit big for me and I'm getting tired of the ride of Al on bad roads.

Both the LOOK 566 and the Specialized Roubaix Elite are in my price range (sub $3000) and seem to offer comfort yet speed.

I don't race and never will. Have been avidly riding for 3 years, been doing group rides for 2 months, ride 30-40 miles a day at 18 mph. On group rides I do my best to stay up with the fastest riders.

Coming from Al and traditional geometry to carbon and compact is going to be a major change. The LOOK TT seems to be a better fit for me. I can ride the Specialized, but not the LOOK.

I guess if some of you think the LOOK 566 could be raced, then it will be perfectly fine for me. Don't think I'll race, but wouldn't want to outgrow the frame in a year.


----------



## mstrongin (Mar 30, 2009)

I was also looking at the Look 566 vs. the Roubaix Pro framesets. I was going to transfer my Campy Chorus set up over from my older bike. Then I tried a Cervelo RS and really liked it. Problem was that the frameset was $2,400 vs. about $1,700 for the other two. Luckily, the bike shop I use most had my size frame in last year's model on sale for $1,800, so it was an easy decision. Love the bike.  Fast, comfortable and it soaks up everything.

Can't go wrong with any of the three, but I'm very happy with my choice.


----------



## maximum7 (Apr 24, 2008)

> I can ride the Specialized, but not the LOOK.


I wouldn't buy any bike I hadn't test ridden first.


----------



## DMFT (Feb 3, 2005)

*Repectfully...........*



climbandcycle said:


> The 555/566 and 585/595 are not in the same class. I have a 585 team and have no issues with flex and I make 17.5w/kg for 5 sec (83kgs). The 555/566 are marketing bikes, they look cool- but that is about it. Look uses the prestige of the higher-end models to sell the budget bikes. I read a great review that someone who owned both had wrote but I can't seem to find it ( to summarize, they did not like the cheaper model, it felt wooden, like a cheap carbon frame). Here is a little info http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/first-look-look-2009-road-bikes-17832 . Look makes great racing bikes, not great entry level bikes. Take a harder look at the Spec. they generally make great bikes at all price points.



......I must disagree to an extent. Previously I have owned a 1st generation 555 w/HSC5 fork built very light with all the hotrod components. It successfully delivered me through 3 Death Rides (129 mi. w/15k climb) along with many other century/training rides. 

Even though the newer 555/566's are a little dumb'd down (now made in Asia) compared to the 1st/2nd gen. bikes (made in Look's Tunisia factory) they will deliver many people, many happy miles. 

For those with the loot to spend in this economy......go for it, buy the hotrod. But for those without an endless piggybank, buy the cheaper bike and upgrade things like wheels/tires and then components down the road.

My .02$

- Wow, I didn't realize how OLD this thread was... And I also forgot to mention since my 555 I've had an S-Works Roubaix and now an S-Works SL2. Both great bikes but these day's there really aren't many "bad" ones out there.......Anyone out there should test-ride any bike before they buy and go into their purchase knowing what type of rider they are and STICK TO YOUR BUDGET. Nobody "needs" Dura Ace or Record to be fast.


----------



## Clicker7 (Aug 11, 2008)

I tested Roubaix Expert, Madone 4.7, and Look 566/ Ultegra -- I liked the ride and handling on the Look by far the best.

I found the Look accelerated quicker, and handled better. I thought the Roubaix was a bit mushy in feel, and found the Madone a little snappier than the Roubaix.

I have the Look two months now and have several hundred miles on it, and love it more each ride. It climbs very well too. I changed tires to Contis GP 4000 s, and that improved ride quality even more. I didn't like the stock tires on any of the bikes.

I think they are all really nice bikes, and you really have to ride them to see what fits you best, and suits your riding style.

Joseph


----------



## Chupalt (Sep 5, 2008)

I picked up my 566 on Friday. I've gotten two longish rides on it this weekend and I really love it.

It accelerates really well and soaks up the road vibration. I'm coming from a litespeed tuscany and have not regretted the switch at all.


----------



## desmo13 (Jun 28, 2006)

Well, I have had mine now since Christmas. It gets better every time I ride it.


----------



## Weav (Jun 21, 2009)

Does anyone know when the 2010 model of the Look 566 comes out and if there are any changes to it from the 2009? I'm considering the Look and the Felt Z series.


----------



## Chupalt (Sep 5, 2008)

The cofidis team edition 566 that I got a couple weeks ago is supposedly a 2010 edition. According to the Look rep it was the first in the states. The only differences from the 2009 model was that it had aksium wheels instead of fulcrum 7s and the bars weren't the carbon wing bars, they were just standard FSA compact bars. Also according to the dealer, the price is going up a couple hundred bucks for 2010. Not sure if that is true or not, they quoted me the 2009 price first so they honored the price that they quoted based on the assumed 2009 price.


----------



## Weav (Jun 21, 2009)

Is that the standard paint scheme for the 2010 Look 566 Rival? It's looks good. How do the Aksium's compare to the Fulcrum 7s, any idea?


----------



## Chupalt (Sep 5, 2008)

I'm not sure if it is a standard color scheme for 2010. I needed a medium and wanted rival and the only color Look usa had in stock for medium rival was the cofidis team color.

I think aksiums and fulcrum 7s are somewhat comparable. They are both pretty heavy semi-aero wheels. Based on the research I did, it seemed like aksiums have less problems than fulcrum 7s. I was happy to get the aksiums personally. I was coming from open pros on ultegra hubs and never had any problems.


----------



## MarvinK (Feb 12, 2002)

You can pick up a 2009 Scott CR1 for under $2k.... I think it's the best less-expensive performance-oriented carbon frame. They're moving the 2010 CR1 to a comfort bike... like the Roubaix.


----------



## maximum7 (Apr 24, 2008)

> You can pick up a 2009 Scott CR1 for under $2k...I think it's the best less-expensive performance-oriented carbon frame.


What other bikes have you ridden in comparison?


----------



## MarvinK (Feb 12, 2002)

I've ridden Roubaix Pro, Madone 4, Look 566, Giant Defy, Scott CR1 and Felt Z35 in that range. The original CR1 frame is stiff, responsive and extremely light... more so than the other $2000 bikes I've seen.


----------



## maximum7 (Apr 24, 2008)

I test rode a CR1 Pro last year and agree with your comments, however I thought its stiffness also made the ride too harsh for my liking and I passed.


----------



## mustang1 (Feb 7, 2008)

The wheels on a bike are such a large part of the experience that you really MUST use the same wheels when comparing bikes. I would go so far as to say the wheels are as important as the frame, they are the two biggest contributors to how a bike feels. Secondary is the groupset: in no way does the group set affect the way a bike handles/feels/accelerates (apart from the wheel hubs). The gruppo defines how a bike brakes, or changes gears. The gruppo's weight plays a part, but realy, the frame and wheelset are the biggest contributors to a bike's performance/handling/feel/acceleration.

EDIT I just realized what an old thread this is and that people mentioned wheels several times... so sorry to repeat. Is anyone still reading this?


----------



## LOUISSSSS (Dec 14, 2009)

mustang1 said:


> EDIT I just realized what an old thread this is and that people mentioned wheels several times... so sorry to repeat. Is anyone still reading this?


yep i'm still reading this. i'm in the process of deciding if a 2009 look 566 w/ Ultegra SL's is still worth it now that 2010 is almost over and 2011 bikes are a few months away.

Here are my choices w/ prices:
2009 Look 566 Ultegra SL - $2400 (1 hour drive to lbs) ('09 Ultegra SL's down the list)
2010 CD Synapse Carbon 4 - $2050 (10 minute drive to lbs) (Rival Drivetrain w/ gossamer crank & tektro brakes)

whats the obvious choice here?


----------



## maximum7 (Apr 24, 2008)

Wait and see what Look has in store for 2011, if you can. 
Then go test ride both those bikes and then get what YOU like.
I'm just gonna tell you to go get the Look and not the Crank-n-fail. Ooops! I mean cannondale. 
But that doesn't mean it's the right bike for you. Only you can decide that.


----------



## MarvinK (Feb 12, 2002)

You should be able to pick up a Look w/Rival for cheaper than the Ultegra model.. shop around. What about the Scott CR1 Elite?


----------



## LOUISSSSS (Dec 14, 2009)

MarvinK said:


> You should be able to pick up a Look w/Rival for cheaper than the Ultegra model.. shop around. What about the Scott CR1 Elite?


been asking around, can't seem to find a 2009 566 w/ Rivals.


----------



## Clicker7 (Aug 11, 2008)

One of my bikes is 2009 Look 566/Ultegra....... sweet ride, and great quality construction on the frame. 

The 566/Ultegra was orignally sellling for around 3200, so 2400 is fair price for Ultegra.

The 2010 is the same frame with different graphics.

Get the Look!

Joseph


----------



## LOUISSSSS (Dec 14, 2009)

Clicker7 said:


> One of my bikes is 2009 Look 566/Ultegra....... sweet ride, and great quality construction on the frame.
> 
> The 566/Ultegra was orignally sellling for around 3200, so 2400 is fair price for Ultegra.
> 
> ...


nice, i just bought the same bike from you. have you upgraded anything on your bike? What do you like most and hate most on it? I'm here thinking those stock $17 hutchingson tires suck, do they?


----------



## Weav (Jun 21, 2009)

The stock hutchinson's aren't that bad actually. They're no Vittoria Open Corsa but they don't cost half as much either. I say ride them into the ground and then splurge for a nice tire, like I'm doing, you'll appreciate the difference when you do. The 1st thing to upgrade on this bike for me was the seat, that thing was a pain in the @ss, litererally. I couldn't go 20 miles without wanting to throw the bike in the ditch because it hurt so bad. I researched seats ad nauseum and found the Cobb V-Flow Plus. It was the best investment I've made, same bike, same fit, same everything, and now I can ride as long as I want without a pain in the butt. Next thing to upgrade is the wheelset. A nice set of wheels will take this bike to another level. I am considering a set of the Dura Ace C24 Tubeless, or maybe Ultegra Tubeless, depending on my wallet next year. I am also considering a pair of handbuilt wheels from Zen Cyclery or Ligero Wheelworks, they would be clinchers though. If you can afford it now I would recommend looking into the Arundel Side-Loader bottle cage. The downtube (depending on what size you got) doesn't allow enough headroom to get a Polar bottle on the seat tube so I've been slumming with one water bottle all year. The sideloader is around $40 so that's why I've been holding off.

Dude, enjoy your new bike, you got a sweet one. And it's nice to know that for those that can still get a 2009 model, Look has raised the price on this bike to around $3400 for the 2010 Ultegra model, so you got a serious bargain considering it's basically the same bike.

Enjoy!


----------



## Clicker7 (Aug 11, 2008)

LOUISSSSS said:


> nice, i just bought the same bike from you. have you upgraded anything on your bike? What do you like most and hate most on it? I'm here thinking those stock $17 hutchingson tires suck, do they?


I upgraded: Saddle (Specialized Taupe); seat post (Spec. Pave SL carbon); tires (Contis GP 4000s).

It's a nice bike, I like everything about it! Quick, great climber, nimble turning, and comfortable.

Stock Hutchinson were like rocks, I got rid of them the first day-- get some Conti's GP's.


Joseph


----------



## LOUISSSSS (Dec 14, 2009)

one step ahead of ya!

just ordered 2x Conti GP4000S for $60 shipped from PBK.


----------



## Clicker7 (Aug 11, 2008)

Louiss:

You won't regret the Contis, they really are smooth, and hug the road. Made a big difference!

Joseph


----------



## maximum7 (Apr 24, 2008)

The Hutchinson's that came on my first Look, a 555, were actually very smooth, grippy, but didn't last very long. I switched to 4000S and have been using them ever since. I don't think they're as soft, as the Hutches', but last way longer. Just got >4,000 on my rear tire before I had to toss it. Also haven't had a flat in more than a year. But now that I mentioned it, I probably will. 

Switch out that FSA garbage and get a Look seat post, and switch to some Ritchey stuff for the cockpit??
Dump the Fulcrums when you can. If money is tight, go to Performance's website and get those Easton EA90SXL wheels for $450. You won't be that deal.


----------



## LOUISSSSS (Dec 14, 2009)

i need some cool looking cages, preferably side-in/out


----------



## Weav (Jun 21, 2009)

LOUISSSSS said:


> i need some cool looking cages, preferably side-in/out


You could run this one on your downtube: 
Arundel Mandible

And one of these two on your seat tube, or you could run both, one on the downtube and the other on the seatube so that they both release the bottle on the same side. Both are sideloaders, just opposites. 
Arundel SideLoader 
Arundel OtherSideLoader


----------



## LOUISSSSS (Dec 14, 2009)

i'm having 2nd thoughts, i dont really want to spend $50/cage. I can get the Specialized Rib Cages for $10-$15/ea. 

I have a size S (51) 566 bike coming, will i be able to use a traditional "top load" bottle cage on the seat tube?


----------



## balatoe (Apr 15, 2009)

I have these on my Cervelo S2 and I think I paid $55 for both with free shipping! They look pretty good with my Cervelo.

If you decide to buy them, make sure you use coupon code USA10 for an additional 10% off.

http://www.probikekit.com/display.php?code=A7900


----------



## LOUISSSSS (Dec 14, 2009)

balatoe said:


> I have these on my Cervelo S2 and I think I paid $55 for both with free shipping! They look pretty good with my Cervelo.
> 
> If you decide to buy them, make sure you use coupon code USA10 for an additional 10% off.
> 
> http://www.probikekit.com/display.php?code=A7900


probikekit has some great prices and free shipping to the USA. i'm awaiting my first ever order from them to arrive. if all goes well. i will order from them more.
i placed my order yesterday, how long should i expect for it to arrive in NYC?


----------



## Weav (Jun 21, 2009)

LOUISSSSS said:


> i'm having 2nd thoughts, i dont really want to spend $50/cage. I can get the Specialized Rib Cages for $10-$15/ea.
> 
> I have a size S (51) 566 bike coming, will i be able to use a traditional "top load" bottle cage on the seat tube?


Yes, but it will be a pain in the butt because the top of your bottle will be close to the top tube and the bottom of the cage might be hindered by the front derailleur clamp. The sloping top tube is what causes this hindrance. Your best bet is to go for a side loader for the seat tube and a cheap model for the downtube. I know, $50 is kinda steep, that's why I have not put a cage yet on my seat tube.


----------



## LOUISSSSS (Dec 14, 2009)

i was thinking of getting some Tri/Aero bars for the bike. Should i just get one bottle on the downtube and use the aerobar's manufacturer's aero bottle mount in the front?


----------



## balatoe (Apr 15, 2009)

LOUISSSSS said:


> probikekit has some great prices and free shipping to the USA. i'm awaiting my first ever order from them to arrive. if all goes well. i will order from them more.
> i placed my order yesterday, how long should i expect for it to arrive in NYC?


I have place several orders from PBK in the past and have no issue with them whatsoever. I live in California and it takes about a week to get here from the UK.


----------



## LOUISSSSS (Dec 14, 2009)

balatoe said:


> I have place several orders from PBK in the past and have no issue with them whatsoever. I live in California and it takes about a week to get here from the UK.


do they ALWAYS offer free shipping to the USA? or is it really only temporary?


----------



## maximum7 (Apr 24, 2008)

> i was thinking of getting some Tri/Aero bars for the bike.


Sacrilege!!!! Maybe you should have looked at Kestrel bikes instead.


----------



## Gov (May 14, 2010)

as a side note, those pbk prices are terrific. has anyone who ordered in the US from there had any issues with needing warranty service on an item and being denied since it was purchased overseas?


----------



## LOUISSSSS (Dec 14, 2009)

So i take it that its a big no-no to clip on aero bars to a road bike?

and i'm still awaiting my PBK order (that i placed on 5/18/2010 Tuesday, i'm in USA)


----------



## runningteach (May 19, 2009)

Oops put this in the wrong place. I'm glad I read this thread because I am waiting on a second cage for my Look. When I bought it last year I only shelled out money for the one cage. I went back this week to get another one and the style changed. My bike shop is trying to locate another one but now I am thinking I should go with a side loader. My frame is a small. I have to add that I love my Look 566.


----------



## MarvinK (Feb 12, 2002)

Can I just say... $50+/ea for cages on a nearly entry-level carbon road bike seems a little ridiculous? The PRO Fiberglass cages are usually under $20 and look nice--they're relatively, light too... although with the 566, it seems like there are much more important areas to easily gain weight savings.

http://www.biketiresdirect.com/ppgbcf/pro_fiberglass_bottle_cage/pp.htm
http://gearwestbike.com/product/pro-fiberglass-bottle-cage-69267-1.htm


----------



## maximum7 (Apr 24, 2008)

When I bought my 555, the dealer threw in the first Look cage, then gave me the other for 1/2 off. I guess the benefits of an LBS. 

Besides, he spent $2500 already, what's another $50?


----------



## Weav (Jun 21, 2009)

MarvinK said:


> Can I just say... $50+/ea for cages on a nearly entry-level carbon road bike seems a little ridiculous? The PRO Fiberglass cages are usually under $20 and look nice--they're relatively, light too... although with the 566, it seems like there are much more important areas to easily gain weight savings.
> 
> http://www.biketiresdirect.com/ppgbcf/pro_fiberglass_bottle_cage/pp.htm
> http://gearwestbike.com/product/pro-fiberglass-bottle-cage-69267-1.htm


Maybe by Look's standards, but I'm not sure I'd call a $3500 bike entry level.

Doesn't solve the seat tube bottle cage dilema though. I still think a sideloader is needed. They look nice, how do they hold up?


----------



## MarvinK (Feb 12, 2002)

I think the cost difference is mainly branding--it's certainly not a cheap-o ebay $500 carbon frame, but I don't think there's any major improvements over the bike that was $2500 (Rival) last year. I think you could say about the same of almost any other major reputable brand carbon bikes. It's not entry-level, but it's nearly entry-level on the full carbon scale. The included Askium wheels help emphasize that. You're looking to spend $3000+ from basically every big name vendor for Ultegra 6700 on a carbon frame--and they all cut corners on the other parts. I said nearly because some brands do offer a super-low-end carbon with 105 mixes and crap other parts. I don't know why people would pay for carbon and settle for less than Ultegra/Rival.

The Arundel cages are really nice--and there really aren't any better side-loaders out there. The pseudo side-loading Specialized Zee cage is another more cost-effective option:
http://www.specialized.com/us/en/bc/SBCEqProduct.jsp?spid=46932&menuItemId=9307&eid=5102

The PRO cages are great and handle slight differences in bottle sizes especially well. PRO is Shimano-branded accessories and I believe any shop can get them through QBP. Any of the fiberglass models are going to be at least as durable as the carbon cages.


----------



## Weav (Jun 21, 2009)

Fair enough assessment MarvinK. There is not a single improvement over last years bike. What I like about the Look is that it's a complete Rival build, with no cut corners that I'm aware of. I don't know why they raised the price this year, maybe because it sold so well that Look thought they were underpriced or maybe because it was a new model they wanted to gain some traction in the marketplace? Either way I'm happy I got in on the 2009 model because I couldn't push my price point up any further, the Madone 5.2 was the other bike I wanted but it was $3500, and I like both bikes equally so it was an easy decision. The Madone 4.7 was a closer comparison in price but after trying it out it didn't appear to be up to the Look's standards. I could tell a big difference between the 4.7 and the 5.2. 

I'll have to keep those Pro cages in mind, Shimano is a brand you can trust to make great parts IMO so I'm sure they are a nice buy.

Next up for my Look 566: Ultegra or Dura Ace Tubeless wheels, a sideloader bottle cage and a nice seat bag. Is there anything worth upgrading other than wheels?


----------



## MarvinK (Feb 12, 2002)

Ya, I like the 566 a lot, too. I think another brand that does a good job of keeping groups together and putting in decent parts is Scott. The Scott CR1 Elite has full Rival (minus Ultegra cassette and chain--which is a better match anyhow) and Kysrium Elites. It's a little more comfort-oriented than the 566, though.


----------



## LOUISSSSS (Dec 14, 2009)

Will i be able to easily get a bottle out of a "regular" bottle cage such as the Tacx Tao on the seattube of my 51 (size S) 566 frame?

i'm thinking i shouldn't be getting $60 bottle cages. i spent a good chunk of money getting the bike, which was already over my budget.


----------



## LOUISSSSS (Dec 14, 2009)

MarvinK said:


> Ya, I like the 566 a lot, too. I think another brand that does a good job of keeping groups together and putting in decent parts is Scott. The Scott CR1 Elite has full Rival (minus Ultegra cassette and chain--which is a better match anyhow) and Kysrium Elites. It's a little more comfort-oriented than the 566, though.


thanks for the input. Thats ironic because i'm getting my look 566 w/ Ultegra SL's and my gf has a Scott Contessa CR1 Pro w/ full ultegras. both, to my research are very good frames to ride an upgrade on.


----------



## Starter (Jan 7, 2009)

People investigating frames that provide relaxed geometry while still maintaining "get up and go" should look no further than the Cervelo RS. The RS absolutely _owns_ both the Roubaix and the 566. Stiffer, more responsive, sprints better, and ridiculously lighter than either of those frames... My 54 weighed in at 969g with the cage bolts and seat post clamp removed... That's with the brazed on mount for the FD and the BB cable guide installed. Roughly half a pound lighter than the 566 frame. 

The 2008 and 2009 RS model years are identical to the 2010, and Slane Cycles has 2009's for around $1,740, and 2008's for around $1,617... Frames come with the 3T Funda Pro, which is a great fork. 2008 has the hot red and black paint job, and I believe it comes with the fantastic Syntace P6 carbon post as well...


----------



## maximum7 (Apr 24, 2008)

> The RS absolutely owns both the Roubaix and the 566.


I dis-agree. I prefer the smoother, refined ride of the 566 over the RS. My buddy has the 566 with the very stiff Ksyrium SL wheels and my other buddy has Easton EA90SLX which are not nearly as harsh, and his RS felt like I was on an aluminum frame.


----------



## MarvinK (Feb 12, 2002)

Starter: If weight and stiffness are important--the Scott CR1 is light, stiff and considerably cheaper than the RS... and nobody mistakes you for a triathlete out on their 'other bike'


----------



## Starter (Jan 7, 2009)

maximum7 said:


> I dis-agree. I prefer the smoother, refined ride of the 566 over the RS. My buddy has the 566 with the very stiff Ksyrium SL wheels and my other buddy has Easton EA90SLX which are not nearly as harsh, and his RS felt like I was on an aluminum frame.


There are many factors that can contribute to a bike feeling harsher. Sizing springs to mind. Sorry to hear you thought the RS felt like an aluminum bike, but your experience is far from the norm... The RS frame has proven itself again and again as one of the smoothest riding frames in the world, as evidenced by countless glowing reviews... And has also earned a reputation as a more-than-capable race machine, with multiple pro tour wins under it's belt.


----------



## maximum7 (Apr 24, 2008)

Well, I'm not dogging it or questioning it's merits. In fact he bought the bike based on my recommendation. I just didn't like it. 
Size on the 566 was a 56. Size on the RS was a 54. A stiffer wheelset on the 566, same tires. Carbon handlbar on the 566 (not that that's a biggie), aluminum on the RS. Stock seat on the RS, WTB Rocket Pro V on the 566. Go figure.


----------



## Starter (Jan 7, 2009)

MarvinK said:


> Starter: If weight and stiffness are important--the Scott CR1 is light, stiff and considerably cheaper than the RS... and nobody mistakes you for a triathlete out on their 'other bike'


What? Nothing about this post makes sense. :lol:


----------

