# Colnago Cristallo frame and fork weight



## fabsroman (Jul 14, 2006)

Okay, just got my 2006 50cm sloping Cristallo and Star carbon fork this weekend. I put both on a postage scale today that measures down to the gram and the frame was at 1,302 grams and the uncut fork was at 499 grams. That is a little, maybe even a lot, heavier than I expected it to be, but it is still plenty light enough for me. Anybody else out there weigh their frames, and if so, what did they come in at?


----------



## tmluk (Sep 19, 2005)

I assumed you have a Star fork. Mine weighted ~ 450-460g un-cut. So your fork is reasonable. Colnago forks are heavier than most. In cyclingnews.com, Ernesto was proud to show how much thicker his forks are. Thickness doesn't mean quality; it depends on CF material and construction as well. I think the Star fork is well made nonetheless. My 2006 C50 55-cm weighted ~ 1240g with Record headset cups. So the Cristallo is a bit heavier which was expected.

Show us some pictures.


----------



## fabsroman (Jul 14, 2006)

Just took some quick pics of the frame. I just ordered a 2007 Campy Record 8 pc groupo for it and I am about to buy a Cinelli Ram bar/stem, some 2007 Campy Record 36 hole hubs, and some black DT Revolution spokes and red DT nipples. The rims are going to be some NOS aluminum Campy Record Strada tubular rims in black with red stickers and some red Tufo tires. The Selle Italia saddle will have red and silver writing/thread on it.


----------



## tmluk (Sep 19, 2005)

Wow. It looks great. I particularly like how the red strips change color under different light and angle. Throw back so much memory of mine early this year building up my C50. One thing that took me a while to figure out was the position of the expnader plug relative to the stem. Once I sorted that out the rest was easy.

Enjoy.


----------



## Clevor (Sep 8, 2005)

I'm not surprised your Cristallo is significantly heavier than a C50. I just picked up my 53 cm C50 three weeks ago and it weighs in at 1198 gms, a porky (to me) 2.64 lbs. I must have gotten a light fork as my uncut Star fork weighs in at 422 gms, one of the lightest I've heard of so far.

What disturbs me about the C50 is the dated lugged technology, therefore there is no reinforced material around the BB area, which they can do on a monocoque frame. Me wonders if that is why Petacchi didn't do so well this year, although he was injured (and I know he rode a beefed up frame). In 2005, he rode a stiff magnesium Dogma FP with massive MOST BB.

If you look at your Cristallo compared to a C50, they added additional material at the BB and seat tube junction via monocoque construction. The head tube looks that way too, thus the extra weight. Maybe this is why the Milram team uses the Cristallo so much. I am surprised the seat and chainstay of the Cristallo is still lugged on to the junctions though.

My 2005 Giant TCR Comp 1 is not the stiffest frame around these days, but there is substantially more material around the BB than the C50 and yet the frame weighs in at 2.09 lbs.


----------



## tmluk (Sep 19, 2005)

I disagree that lugged CF frames are dated because a lot of Pro Teams frames are lugged CF: COLNAGO Extreme-Power/C50, LOOK 585/595, TIME VXRS.
There are other hi-end lugged CF frames: PARLEE Z-frames and CALFEE.

Can't say which is better (continuous monoque or lugged) because it all depends on design, material and construction.


----------



## gun2head (Sep 3, 2006)

*awesome*

Now we're talking bike porno!! Oh yeah........Love the ital components you're putting on it. Can't wait to see whole rig once together. Thanks for sharing.

Nice shop by the way.


----------



## fabsroman (Jul 14, 2006)

Gun2head,

Thanks for the compliments. I am pretty happy with my frame and my shop/garage even though the garage is a little sloppy right now.

TMluk and Trevor,

I have no idea whether monocoque or lugged technology is better than the other, or if they are just as good with different attributes separating them. There is another thread in this forum about some guy riding an Extreme C, hitting a medium size pothole, and having the headtube separate from the top tube. If his story is true, I don't know if I would ever be buying an Extreme C. Now, the Extreme Power is supposed to be reinforced in the bottom bracket. The fact that reinforcement was needed in that frame leads me to believe that the C50 just did not cut it for the sprinters. If they liked the C50, why would Colnago have to create the Extreme Power. Also, if the climbers liked the C50, why would he have to create the Extreme C? I have taken the position that the C50 is a good all around bike, but not a great bike in any specific category with maybe the exception of comfort.


----------



## manandjoe (Apr 14, 2006)

*Cristallo 07*

While we're sharing. Cristallo 54cm color SE1. I hate to see how much this weigh's.


----------



## gun2head (Sep 3, 2006)

*Who cares...*

Who cares how much it wieghts...it's too damn beautiful to care!!!!

Awesome looking frame and paint scheme.


----------



## fabsroman (Jul 14, 2006)

Yeah, I'm not losing any sleep over the weight of my frame and so far, I am plenty happy with it.

Manandjoe,

That paint scheme is starting to look better. In fact, i think I prefer that scheme in silver over the red that I initially thought was better.

I figured you would eventually see these pics on this thread, so I didn't e-mail them to you. I ordered the 2007 campy Record groupo from 11 speed. Thanks for the tip. Send or post pics of how your build is going. Me, I am hoping to have my completed by Christmas. Right now, the only issue I have is deciding whether to go 2 or 3 cross on my training set of wheels, and which spoke length to use. I have 3 cross wheels that I have been using for decades without any problems, and I don't want to mess with a good thing, but 2 cross looks a little nicer and they are a tiny bit lighter. See the things I worry about? LOL I'll probably go with 3 cross and call it a day, and then go with two cross on the lighter set of rims for racing.


----------



## gibson00 (Aug 7, 2006)

fabsroman said:


> Yeah, I'm not losing any sleep over the weight of my frame and so far, I am plenty happy with it.
> 
> Manandjoe,
> 
> ...


I've built both 2 and 3 cross wheels for myself. If you do the calculation, the weight difference is -really- tiny, we're talking maybe 30 - 40 grams I think? Strength wise, I've noticed no difference. When I build now, the only factor I use in deciding which pattern to use, is what spoke lengths my LBS has in stock. Then I use brass nipples on the rear drive side, and alloy everywhere else.

Also, with regards to Colnago making the Extreme C, etc., I think it has very little to do with the C50 not being good enough. Remember, manufacturers have to continue to come out with new products to compete in the market, regardless of how good their previous products were. The C50 has won countless number of races, including field sprints. Right now the market is all hot and bothered for light weight frames. So Colnago naturally has to spit out a lighter version of its top end frame to compete for sales. Is it a better frame? I have no idea, and don't think it really matters, as they had to make it to compete for sales. Just my .02. I weigh about 78 KG, so a few grams on my frame won't matter.... 

BTW, both the Cristallos posted in this thread look sweet, looking forward to seeing the build pics!


----------



## gibson00 (Aug 7, 2006)

OK, couldn't resist figuring out the difference in spoke/wheel weight between 2 cross and 3 cross.
Someone please check my math:

DT Competition 1.8/1.6 spoke weight = 311 grams for 64 spokes at 264mm.

So:
weight per spoke = 311 / 64 = 4.86 grams.

So weight per mm of spoke = 4.86 / 264 = 0.018409

Based on spocalc, the difference in spoke length between 2 cross and 3 cross is about 7mm per spoke.
So, 
0.018409 * 7 = 0.12886
So savings per wheelset (64 spokes total) =

0.12886 * 64 = *8.24 grams.*


----------



## manandjoe (Apr 14, 2006)

Fabsroman,

I ordered the record as well, compact cranks. I could not resist! As far as wheels I think I will go with silver Mavic SL3. Do you know where can I get a deal on cinelli ram bars or setposts?

As far as weight is concerned, I weigh 195lbs so a few 100 grams either way is a joke. Riding position and aero dynamics are much more important vs weight. 

Regards


----------



## fabsroman (Jul 14, 2006)

I ended up buying my Cinelli Ram bars and seatpost off of e-bay. I bought the seatpost brand new for $176 and some off change (i.e., I won that auction by 13 cents), and the bars cost me $485 from some e-bay store called ital-techno, but they also included the checkpoint with them. I think they also have a website, but I didn't check out the bar price on the website.

Did a quick search and this is their website:

http://www.ital-tecno.com/shopdisplayproducts.asp?page=3

I think that should take you to the Ram Bars, but their price with the checkpoint is $575. Check out e-bay and type in "Cinelli Ram". You will find everything up for auction, and underneath all the auction stuff there are several Ram Bars for sale at a fixed price (.e., By It Now). They might still have some for sale in your size.

I'll agree that bike weight is a joke when we start talking about bikes around 15 lbs. The main reason for me buying this bike was the indexed shifting, correct frame size (i.e., when I bought my steel bike at age 15, it was just too big for me and I never grew into it), additional gearing, and the hope that carbon fiber is more comfortable than steel or aluminum. I normally weight 150 lbs, so weight is a little bit more of an issue for me. However, I stepped on the scale this morning and it came back with 158. I wanted to throw it out the window because I have never weighed that much and weighed 150 consistantly throughout the summer and most of September. I'll have to check my weight again later today because 8 lbs. makes a heck of a difference going up hills.


----------



## fabsroman (Jul 14, 2006)

Bumped for Nedworthy.


----------



## dan1vic2 (Mar 4, 2007)

*Star Fork*

My Colnago Cristallo came in with a CLX fork, not the Star that I was led to believe 
was the standard on the Cristallo. Every picture you see on the internet has the Star 
fork on the Cristallo.


----------



## fabsroman (Jul 14, 2006)

I think I had to pay extra for my Star fork. Mine is a 2006 and it came standard with a Street fork.


----------



## rossb (Oct 11, 2005)

I had the option of the star fork and the CLX fork, and opted to pay a couple of hundred bucks extra for the star fork.


----------

