Hey guys. I had a quick question. After a couple years of riding crap bikes, I'm finally going to lay down some serious $$$ on a new "dream" bike. I've narrowed down the list of frames quite a bit and, until now, wasn't even considering the 595. Here's the scoop, my LBS carries a pretty wide range of bikes including Colnago, Wilier, Kuota, Cyfac, Cervelo, and BMC. Of those brands, the BMC seems like it would be the best frame for me (I am 5'6" and weigh 135 lbs. right now - hopefully I'll lose another 5 lbs. by the time racing starts). I was looking at the SOloist Carbon because it is comparatively inexpensive and is a great bike. However, issues with toe overlap in small Cervelo frames, and inclinations that the bike might be too harsh for a smaller rider like myself, has resulted in my steering clear of Cervelo - plus, everyone has one. Anyway...

Between the Look 595 and the BMC SLC-01, what are some strengths and weaknesses of both frames? They are both around the same cost, and I like the flexibility that comes with a non-integrated seatpost in the BMC. I also like that my LBS carries them because I'd prefer to give them my business and know that I am getting the absolute perfect frame size. However, I haven't heard ANY negative things about the Look. There is a Look dealer located a coulpe hours from where I live, and if need be, I would be willing to drive up there to get my frame. What do you guys think (bias aside please)?

How do the frames compare as far as stiffness - my guess is that the Ultra would be too stiff??
How compliant are they?
Ride quality?
Suitability for racing - Crits, RRs... (how risky is it to race on a carbon frame btw.?)?

If it comes down to "pick whichever one you think looks better" or "pick your country", please let me know. Thanks in advance for any and all resposes. I wouldn't bother posting, but it's getting more and more difficult to make the absolute right decision when it comes to distinguishing between bike frames/componentry these days. THANKS!!!!!

Jon H.

I'm your height and weight, but I would choose either the significantly cheaper 585, to get the seatpost flexibility or the new 586. I've been riding a 585 for two seasons now and really like it. It's plenty stiff, but still has good ride. You'll want a 51cm in the LOOK or a 49cm in the BMC.

As for racing on one, I always advise to race a frame that you can afford to crash and trash. Crashes seem to be inevitable.

The August review in Cyclingnews.com describes the SLC-01 Pro as more flexible than other frames they have tested recently.
I personally believe that the 595 is in a higher league.
You are right in saying that it's probably better to go with the one you like the most!

I haven't ridden the BMC but the Look is the stiffest frame I've ever ridden, and damn comfy too.

The bike just does it all.....and can be found at real good prices.

Thanks guys. I think I'm just going to have to go and test ride both bikes to see what I think of them. Beyond looking at pictures and reading review after review, it's quite difficult to make progress towards purchasing a new machine. I will ask my LBS about the possibilty of getting a Look frame in, I really would like to give them the business. However, if worst comes to worst, I could always buy the frame separately, and still purchase all of the components/accessories from them. Thanks again!

Is it worth considering the Ultra? I'm sure there have been other posts about the 595 vs. the 595 Ultra, but what are your thoughts? I noticed that most of the pictures of 595s wree of the Ultra version.

believe the advantages of the ultra are best capitalized on a larger frame. at our frame size and weight, the origin will suffice.

fwiw, I had an Origin and now have an Ultra 595. I'm riding an XL. As for comfort, can't tell the difference btwn the two. both are rockets