# CT2 Vs. C50, Recommendations ?



## RudyQ3 (Jul 14, 2004)

Hi all,
I must apologize for posting this thread because it may seem repetitive, but all other threads here don't really do a good job of comparing subjectively the difference/impressions of the ride of these two bikes.  

I'm considering purchasing either one of these although I must admit that the CT2 is more realistic finacially.

I own an older 1997 Litespeed Catalyst (renamed to Tuscanny the next year) and a 2003 Kestrel Talon. The Litespeed is very comfortable but quite flexy, robbing me of precious power, little that I have. The Talon is quite stiff, giving me a rush to hammer hard but uncomfortable on long rides.

I'm looking for a pure road bike that's comfy and doesn't rob me of any power (i.e. responsive, doesn't everyone?). Can someone PLEASE give me a subjective comparison of these 2 bikes?
Most descriptions of either of these bikes have been "nice ride", "Responsive", "light", "stiff", etc. It does not help me to determine which is better for me since I have nothing to base upon. Unfortunately my LBS do not have either of these in stock for me to test ride 

Thanks all, and sorry for the rambling


----------



## terry b (Jan 29, 2004)

RudyQ3 said:


> Most descriptions of either of these bikes have been "nice ride", "Responsive", "light", "stiff", etc. It does not help me to determine which is better for me since I have nothing to base upon.


Those are subjective opinions of those bikes. What you want is an _objective_ opinion, and when it comes to bikes, there is no such thing.

I think you're going to have a bit of a problem getting what you want. First of all, I doubt many people own both of those bikes, or have ridden them individually enough to be able to give a detailed assessment. Second, since there is no way to collect quantifiable data on the actual differences between the two, all you're going to get is "rides nice", "damps road vibration", "takes off when I ask it too" and other unmeasureable answers. It's the nature of personal bike reviews, they're _personal_.

Only you can decide which is better for you. Both are top end frames (and I am of the opinion that almost all top end frames behave the same) and you should expect excellent performance in both cases. I'd be really surprised if you were disappointed in either.

Compared to your two bikes, you can probably expect the CT2 to be much less flexy than your older Litespeed and you might expect the C50 to be stiff just like your Kestrel. I don't really know what else to tell you, it's a pain to not be able to do a thorough test ride, but then I have bought all my bikes without test rides (including my 3 Colnagos.) Simply put, your decision is whether you want carbon or Ti, which paint job you like and how much money you want to spend. Also, with 1000s of other frames available, whether Colnago is absolutely the best choice. If you're hung up on a test ride, maybe you'd be better off buying something you can test.


----------



## RudyQ3 (Jul 14, 2004)

Thanks Terry for your reply...but can you say that the C50 is stiffer than the CT2? A lot stiffer? or just a little? Can you tell a difference in the ride quality between the two?
Is the CT2 more comfortable? Can you notice a difference? etc..

I know that stiffness is all relative to all riders. But at least it'll give me an idea of which characteristics are better with which bike.

BTW you're right, I'm embarassed to say that it's the objective opinions that I seek.


----------



## RudyQ3 (Jul 14, 2004)

Oh BTW Terry, since you own 3 Colnagos, I would like to hear your comments on your bikes..


BTW I kept seeing some issues concerning Colnago's Italian BB coming unscrewed/loose. Is this an issue? or just a random case from time to time.


----------



## terry b (Jan 29, 2004)

RudyQ3 said:


> Thanks Terry for your reply...but can you say that the C50 is stiffer than the CT2? A lot stiffer? or just a little? Can you tell a difference in the ride quality between the two?
> Is the CT2 more comfortable? Can you notice a difference? etc..
> 
> I know that stiffness is all relative to all riders. But at least it'll give me an idea of which characteristics are better with which bike.
> ...


No idea on the CT2 whatsoever - the closest I've ever come to one is riding next to it. My C50 is stiff enough compared to some of the other bikes I own. It snaps into forward when I ask it too. My number one impression of it is that it's a quick bike, although I'm not any faster on it over the long haul.

I have the C50, a Dream and a Master X Light. They all ride really nicely, capable of long hauls and short hops. The MxL of course is a lot heavier and when dragging it up a hill it feels that way. However, its mission is to provide a nice, solid, comfortable, traditional steel ride. And it does that very well.

The Dream gives more of what you'd expect from an aluminum frame. Snappy, quick and light. I am in the "good aluminum rides well" camp, so I won't call it harsh and unforgiving as some might. It's a very simple, no frills (except for the GEO paint job!) quick little racing bike. Not really anything to distinguish it from the other aluminum bikes I own.

The C50 is just what you'd expect from a high-end CF bike. Light, comfortable and quick and an all-around great performer. Wouldn't be a bad choice for your "one and only" bike. It does everything (for me) very well. But, it's not so special that they're aren't a ton of other bikes that can do the same things just as well.

With Colnagos, I think it all comes down to if you like the slacker steering and whether the paint jobs get you jazzed. Both are true for me.


----------



## 6was9 (Jan 28, 2004)

*The general consensus is...*



RudyQ3 said:


> Thanks Terry for your reply...but can you say that the C50 is stiffer than the CT2? A lot stiffer? or just a little? Can you tell a difference in the ride quality between the two?
> Is the CT2 more comfortable? Can you notice a difference? etc..
> QUOTE]
> 
> ...


----------



## RudyQ3 (Jul 14, 2004)

6was9 said:


> RudyQ3 said:
> 
> 
> > Thanks Terry for your reply...but can you say that the C50 is stiffer than the CT2? A lot stiffer? or just a little? Can you tell a difference in the ride quality between the two?
> ...


----------



## 6was9 (Jan 28, 2004)

*I don't think I've ever...*



RudyQ3 said:


> This is exactly what I'm talking about....I like Ti but at the same time...my old Litespeed was just too flexy and it gives me a bad taste in my mouth about Ti, albeit it's the MOST comfortable bike I've ever ridden.
> 
> The CT2 is using the 6/4 Ti which would be a plus in terms of stiffness. I hope it's stiff enough though. Coming from a bike like the Kestrel talon, I just love that acceleration and the BB just won't flex. Trouble is, on longer ride with the Talon, I could use more comfort.


heard CT1 or CT2 being too flexy. They are always described as perfectly stiff and comfortable.... 

I think, if you can, you should test ride a C50 (or any other CF frame) and compared to your Talon as not all CF frames ride same for example C40 is supposedly more comfortable than C50...C40 might be your ticket although it isn't the newest frame from Colnago you can find them much cheaper than C50.


----------

