# Pro Cycling 595 review



## fillmore (Apr 2, 2005)

Pro Cycling published yet another useless vague reveiw. This time it was on the Look 595. They liked the bike and said it handled well but were somewhat bothered by the little rattling of the internal cables on the downtube. They did their usual fill of how the handle bars weren't to their liking and it didn't feel right climbing until the tester realized it had a 42 instead of the usual 39 chainring. I skimmed over it at the local Borders so I may not have got the full of it but what I did get was that the 595 handle good and it had good stiffnes. Now what bike at this level won't handle good unless it's the wrong size. They should spend more time on the qualities of the frame and less on filling their text quota with useless information.


----------



## team_sheepshead (Jan 17, 2003)

Agreed. Most so-called bike reviews are a crock, and Pro Cycling's are among the worst. For example, Marcel Wust, who reviewed the 595, said he heard a scraping sound coming from one of the Mavic wheels. He figured it was just a one-off problem and ignored it. Didn't have his mechanic check it, didn't call Mavic, nothing.

I used to write gear reviews. As with me, I would assume Pro Cycling gets demo models shipped to them for free. If they write a bad review, those free Look bikes might just stop coming. 

I interviewed for a job at Bicycling magazine once and told them that most of their bike and gear reviews were pathetic and needed some real science behind them. Needless to say, I did not get the job.


----------



## ico (Feb 6, 2005)

*it's a shame*

it's a shame that Marcel Wust was given this frame on test, he writes reviews like he is writing a postcard from hollidays, not only with 595 but almost with every bike. Personaly I like Chris Boardman, who also writes reviews for Procycling. His reviews are much better.Two years ago he was testing a 585 for Procycling, few months after that review I recevied my 585 and I found everything he wrote to bu true, so I belive that you can depend on his reviews, and it's not all "very nice" and "very good" all the time. Regarding Marcel Wust test conclusion on 595 that "look certainly meets highest expectations and deserves to be loved", I don't know why he even bothered, becuse we knew that allready


----------



## ethanweiss90 (Aug 14, 2006)

*magazine bike reviews*

a friend of mine recently returned from Paris, and brought back a few magazines, including one cycling-based, Le Cycle. What I could glean from it in my basic French is that they actually do _stress tests_ and measure the offset of each frame in particular directions, and compare it to a benchmark in that price segment. that right there is going scientific, i'll say. granted, i don't think i need to know how much my BB offset is, i think it's impressive.

website is www.lecycle.fr

last time i checked it didn't open, but its worth a try.


----------



## Fignon's Barber (Mar 2, 2004)

Marcel Wust seems like a nice guy, but he is a former pro rider, not an engineer or designer. Many pros just get on the bike and ride. Aluminium,steel,carbon, whatever; they just ride. I love it when they interview some pros about their new team bikes and ask how they compare to the previous team bike. Often, you see answers like," uhh, I like the blue better than last year's green paint". 
The best pro reviews were from Alan Peiper in Cyclesport in the mid 1990's. He was living in flanders and would put a different pro bike through the paces over the belge bergs each issue. Every month, he would rip the bike. In his final review before they got rid of him, Alan confessed that he thought all bikes were crap. 
Marcel Wust is a bit more lighthearted. My favorite Wust was when he reviewed the Litespeed Vortex, and saw the 6/4 Ti sticker. He wrote, " this must mean its 60% aluminium, 40% titanium". Now there's an opinion you can rely on.


----------



## haz a tcr (Sep 29, 2005)

ethanweiss90 said:


> a friend of mine recently returned from Paris, and brought back a few magazines, including one cycling-based, Le Cycle. What I could glean from it in my basic French is that they actually do _stress tests_ and measure the offset of each frame in particular directions, and compare it to a benchmark in that price segment. that right there is going scientific, i'll say. granted, i don't think i need to know how much my BB offset is, i think it's impressive.
> 
> website is www.lecycle.fr
> 
> last time i checked it didn't open, but its worth a try.


For english speakers the aussie Ride magazine measures BB, and headtube deflections on all tested bikes. A very good mag I might add.

As far as testing goes though the german TOUR magazine would have to take the cake - they do the same thing as Ride but also have fork stiffness and all measurements are in Nm. They also take the actual frame weights and give a stiffness to weight ratio, and rate the frames on paint, finish, warranty and manuals. They have also tested wheels for aerodynamics and tires and tubes for rolling resistance.


----------



## sbrsport (Dec 26, 2005)

I agree on that review. I read it and found it to be useless. Cycling Weekly usually does good reviews. They have their race bike of the year issue where they actually rank the bikes and tell you what they like about each one. And, I have read reviews of other frames that they didn't really seem to like (an Otrott in one case). If you are thinking about buying a frame, it is worthwhile to pay to download their article on the frame in question if they have one.


----------

