Im still waiting for my LOOK KG486, but there is a ORBEA orca just arrive in the shop, the owner of the shop advise me to take the ORBEA instead of the LOOK, he give very good review and value for money on this bike but I cant really trust him and you know why. Could you help me out.

Thanks
:rolleyes:

Im still waiting for my LOOK KG486, but there is a ORBEA orca just arrive in the shop, the owner of the shop advise me to take the ORBEA instead of the LOOK, he give very good review and value for money on this bike but I cant really trust him and you know why. Could you help me out.

Thanks
:rolleyes:
Hello!
I'm riding the 486 and I can't say anything else than wait as long as it requires it's worth it. I've never tried the ORBEA but this bike is a beauty and it works perfect. And the the local shop owner is interested in selling what he is having in his shop.
Gary

The 486 is made of high modulus (HM) carbon fiber. The Orca is standard/intermediate modulus carbon fiber (700 series fiber). The 486 is made by a company that has been making carbon frames for over a decade. The Orca is the first carbon fiber model from its maker.

Not sure what the price is on the Orca but I believe its in the same ballpark as the 486. So do you even need to ask the question which one to get?

Watch your wallet with that shop owner.

We are a Orbea dealer and I am a frame junkie. The Orca is an incredible ride. Super snappy and lively (not the qualities that the Look is really known for)! I've ridden the Look, and it is nice. I also have a 5900 and IMHO the Orca eclipses both. Oh, by the way at 1000 bucks less than the Look. I would say the Orbea feels more like a C-40 than anything else. Give it a try. If you are anywhere near Michigan, give me a shout and take mine for a spin.

Chad

Orbea is one of the largest bicycle frame manufacturers in the world. The Orca has received excellent reviews. Check out http://www.pezcyclingnews.com/?pg=fullstory&id=1914

Also, the Orca claims to be about 1 pound lighter (2.2 lbs) and the list price for the Orca frameset is $2,200 while the KG486 is priced at $3,200. I also think the Orbea color schemes/graphics are better.

I currently ride a Look KG386. I have had great luck with it so far. However, if something was to happen to it - the Orca is at the top of my list as a replacement.

First, I agree with the others who have warned you to be leery of a shop salesperson who tries to convince you to buy a bike in stock versus one that has to be ordered. The margins on most bikes at a certain price point are very close (usually within 3-5%). So a shop stands to gain little by ordering a bike as opposed to what it will loose when it has to discount inventory at the end of a model year.

Second, in response to this post, it is a misconception--and oversimplification--that high modulus CF is of higher quality than SM or IM carbon fiber. The real value of a particular CF composite is only determined by its application. There are too many variables in frame design and construction that dictate which type is best suited for a particular frame. The only absolute regarding HM carbon fiber is that it?s more expensive. As far as I'm concerned, the marketing of HM carbon fiber is a lot of hype and IM carbon fiber provides the best combination of strength (tensile strength) and stiffness (tensile modulus) at any price point. Furthermore, where HM exceeds in stiffness, it lacks in strength (as compared to SM or IM) and, therefore, is more brittle than SM or IM carbon fiber. But again, the consequences of that characteristic depend on design and construction. And that's the beauty of using carbon composites to build bike frames. Any two (or twenty) engineers can achieve the same desired results using different combinations of materials and processes. For the money (and not necessarily in terms of value) a frame made primarily of IM carbon composite (or even SM, for that matter) can be effectively reinforced (in strength and stiffness) first, by proper design and construction, and by strategic application of other grades of CF or alloys. The end product may be an equally performing, yet more affordable, bike. So the next time you hear someone (a shop guy or a riding buddy) hype is HM carbon fiber frame, take it with a grain of salt (knowing he or she isn't a materials engineer) and be content riding off on your Kestrel, Aegis, Orbea or whatever comparable quality frame you're enjoying.

I'm sure the day is coming when CF will be the primary material out of which most bikes are made, but that day is a long way off as the industry experiments with carbon fiber. Until then, I'll stick with titanium. Then again, don't be surprised if we all look back in retrospect one day and realize, ironically, that steel was the material of the future.



The 486 is made of high modulus (HM) carbon fiber. The Orca is standard/intermediate modulus carbon fiber (700 series fiber). The 486 is made by a company that has been making carbon frames for over a decade. The Orca is the first carbon fiber model from its maker.

Not sure what the price is on the Orca but I believe its in the same ballpark as the 486. So do you even need to ask the question which one to get?

Watch your wallet with that shop owner.

A very good and imformative reply.
Look have years of carbon bike making and are constantly bringing out new frames at an amazing rate.
Orbea have years of frame building experience. They are not going to make a bad frame. Many race teams use the Orbea and it's very hard to find anything said against it at all. This can not be said for many other frames from other top end bike firms.
As for tech, highly compact frame is on it's way out and bikes are now becoming more traditional in design or semi compact, graded with size.
Carbon will come of age, and I think it's almost there with the cheaper mass produced frames coming in from the far east and being branded by whoever. The carbon build technique is coming along as competition in frame design hots up. Aluminium has gome about as far as it can, now with hydroform tubes, lightness/strenght/weight and comfort, real top end ride. Just look 10 years ago to see how it has evolved.
Steal will never die.
Titanium is for those who don't trust carbon, but still want the top end.

[QUOTE=zdpn03]Orbea is one of the largest bicycle frame manufacturers in the world. The Orca has received excellent reviews. Check out http://www.pezcyclingnews.com/?pg=fullstory&id=1914

Pez reviews are totally worthless. I've never read a single one that was critical - they seem to liberally borrow from the marketing literature of the manufacturers.

But the Orca, and the 486, has a decent reputation.
Buy what you want, not what the shop owner wants to sell you. Or better yet, find a shop that you can trust.

Well I happen to have both a 486 and an Orca.
To clear one thing up T700 carbon is a HM carbon and actually can give a nicer ride then the T900. But that's another story.
Both Frames are exquisitely engineered and are Monocoque one piece frames. The look has a full carbon Super HM fork and is a little lighter then the Orbea's. The Orbea Frame is almost one pound lighter then the Look.
Ride is beautiful on both frames. Little or no flex but very smooth. (blows Ti away, I have Merlin Too). The ride difference comes down to the fact that the Look has a shorter than normal top tube and tight head angels. This offers a very well balanced machine and is still super stable tracking. The Orbea has a little more traditional road geometry and is very stable at high speed as well. I would say the 486 would have the edge in a Criterium and the Orbea would have the upper hand as a road race machine. The Orbea hand painted DA 10 Bike is $4800 where as the had painted LE 486 is $400o for the frame set only. Because Orbea Spain owns part of Orbea USA they are able to offer a much higher value package in a top pro-level Bicycle. You should have no hesitation in either of these frames and should be riding the one you can get now.