Waiting for my road bike's damage assessment from the LBS and the claim officer to figure out how the insurance company's going to compensate me, I have, of course, been dreaming of framesets, thinking I'm going to finally have a good excuse to splurge this time around.

The problem is, due to my location I won't have an opportunity to test ride these frames: BMC Pro Machine, Cervelo R3 (or Soloist Carbon?), Look 585. There are a couple others I've spent some time on, but these seem to purvey the whispers most wanton in my willing ear. I'm 6'4" 210 lbs and a bit of a big gear masher, albeit a slow one. Thought about a C50, but I'm not really into it; maybe that's a problem. I can get a good deal on a SystemSix from the LBS, but I just don't feel like owning another Cannondale, for some reason. Everyone has one. Am I crazy for even thinking about the first mentioned, even though I won't be able to pre-ride? If not, which one should I get?

Thanks!

I haven't ridden any of those you mentioned. But I have read reviews and they all seem to be great. BMC probably being the heaviest, and the R3 the lightest. The 585 doesn't seem to turn me on anymore, probably because the 595 came out... This probably doesnt help much, but whatever one of those bikes you get is going to be great....

by the way what insurance did you use (car insurance, house insurance?)... and was it worth it?

competitivecyclist.com has a thing where they ship you a test bike, and you get to ride it for a week. they have bmc's and cervelo's.

http://www.competitivecyclist.com/za/CCY?PAGE=DEMO_HOME

I jave a BMC SLT-01 and an R3. I have ridden the SLC-01 and actually preferred my SLT. Between the two I own I like the BMC better. The R3 weighs in at 16.5 lbs and the BMC goes about 16.9. Both are set up pretty much the same. I don't know how the SLC you compared to the others was the heaviest, it's a pretty light bike although it doesn't look it. The Cervelo in 61cm will come in at 2.065 lbs (939 gms give or take) and the SLC should go 2.09 lbs (950 gms). If you are so in tune with your body that you notice weight differences like that you are a baaaaad maaaan! If I were looking at the two I'd definately go with the BMC.

I have a BMC SLC01 Pro Machine and a Look 595 Origin, and a 585 in the garage. Both the Look and the BMC are excellent, excellent bikes but I'd say the BMC feels more aggressive, slightly stiffer and handles much quicker. The Look(s) by comparison feel more stable and a bit more compliant on the rough roads. For 80% of my riding I prefer the Look. I reach for the BMC when I expect a day with lots of attacks or sprints.

by the way what insurance did you use (car insurance, house insurance?)... and was it worth it?

I am in the process of using the auto insurance of the lady who hit me with her truck. So far it's been a waiting game, and I'm sure it will turn into a real pain in the ass, but I'm hoping it will be worth it.

--that's good information all around. There's no doubt about it, there are some well-equipped cyclists haunting this site. Any other opinions are greatly appreciated.

I didn't know about the test ride deal at competitive cyclist--sounds like an almost ideal solution to my problem. I'm about to check out the link provided, but is there any reason NOT to do something like that? Even if I have to throw down some cash, it seems like it would be worth it just to show up at the group ride every week with a different $3M+ frameset.

Thanks again

The demo program costs something like $200 (though it is deducted from the price if you end up buying one from them). I understand the BMC warranty is 3 years. I'm surprised by that-would be something I'd seriously take into consideration. The Cervelo is lifetime. At your size, fit is also an issue. My guess is the R3 is more suited based on your riding style - though light is among stiffest frames tested (only the caad9 tests stiffer).

Having owned a Soloist Carbon and a couple of Looks, I can at least make a comparison there (haven't owned a BMC). The Soloist is a great machine with a lifetime warranty; it's comfy, fast, a great climber and gets a lot of attention. But with Look you get a little more pedigree (since they've been around longer), a higher level of craftmanship (examples: dissappointing paint-job details on the Soloist with stickers coming off, as opposed to the Look wich has the same internal routing but with less noise and great paint / details), a precise decender, and a company (at least LookUSA) that will do their best to make you a happy customer (although I haven't had to deal with Cervelo's customer service to compare).

So, for what it's worth, I would choose the 585 over just about any bike right now short of full custom - and I've owned over 30 bikes over the years (mt. cx, road, and "vintage").

I understand the BMC warranty is 3 years. I'm surprised by that-would be something I'd seriously take into consideration. The Cervelo is lifetime.

All due respect, I wouldn't worry too much about the warranty thing. Look into your Pinarellos, Colnagos, Look and the majority of elite EU builders and they all have comparatively short warranties. It should not be taken as an indication of the quality, strength or durability of the product. I believe the laws in the EU are different and they aren't really allowed to offer the lifetime warranties we know and love here in North America. But I could be wrong about that.

Cervelo's lifetime warranty is certainly preferable, but unfortunately there are quite a few stories of riders here on this forum who needed to use that warranty, and well under three years. Not trying to bash Cervelo...they're great bikes no doubt...it's just something to consider.

I've always admired Look's quality and its--as you say--pedigree is duly noted. A big concern of mine with the Look frame is that it, well, looks. . .noodly. I mean, it certainly looks cool, but it just doesn't seem very beefy at all. Looks can be deceiving, of course, but, as mentioned, I'm a big guy and a gear masher and I don't want a frame that's going to make my chain rub my front derailleur every other hillclimb. No pun intended on any of that. Am I being silly here, or is this a legitimate worry? "the seamus" above states that, while he owns Look, he runs BMC when he knows he's going to really tax the frame.

Hate to do this, but I'm throwing another frame into the mix (I was into them, then not, but after doing a little research I'm coming back around): Scott Addict.

A sincere thanks for the help.

By the way, competitivecyclist demo program costs 200 bucks per demo period (one week), and only 100 of that counts toward purchase (they deduct 100 bucks for shipping).

Hate to do this, but I'm throwing another frame into the mix (I was into them, then not, but after doing a little research I'm coming back around): Scott Addict.

A sincere thanks for the help.

By the way, competitivecyclist demo program costs 200 bucks per demo period (one week), and only 100 of that counts toward purchase (they deduct 100 bucks for shipping).

i didnt know what the demo program cost. i figured it had to cost something, but all i knew is they started it when they sent me an email about it.

while it may make your decision tougher, i think the scott is a very good frame to add into the mix. i have a cr1, and i love it. i dont know what the differences in geometry between the cr1 and addict, but i know the addict is lighter still. i have only had it a month or so, but its been really great. its my first true road bike, but it appears to be everything everyone has said. climbs great, super stiff bb, very light, and for me, pretty comfy. i have no trouble on the decents. like i said, im pretty new to road bikes, and descending is one of the areas that concerns me. but, i feel confident, it doesnt seem twitchy, and i am able to keep up with more experienced riders on fast club rides.

i think scott's might be easier to find a dealer for (altho i dont know your area). if you find a lbs with scott's, they prob wont have very many addicts to try, but if you ask, i think the rep will bring you one. the shop i got my cr1 from had an addict for a couple weeks for test rides.

If you're concerned with Look frames looking noodly... They have Ultra models of the 585 and 595 which are set up to be firmer than the standard models.

The C50 has a nice, stiff headtube area that bigger riders do well with...on the other hand,in smaller sizes it is really on the stiff(harsh) side.

The Look is a little lighter and little springier. It doesn't have quite the the rigidity of the C50 but its torsionally more rigid than the BMC.

I'm also in the market for a new frame. I haven't landed on one yet as comfort ranks high. I rode a 585 over the weekend which was too small but still was very impressed. As for the Look 585 being noodly,.......two words: Thor Hushovd.

The Look is a little lighter and little springier. It doesn't have quite the the rigidity of the C50 but its torsionally more rigid than the BMC.[/QUOTE]

So you're saying, in terms of rigidity, C50>Look>BMC ? "the seamus" would disagree, as I believe he stated he opts for his BMC over his Look when he knows he's going to be sprinting. Do you own all three? I guess, from what I've gleaned researching this site, I had deduced that it was more like BMC>Look=C50. Any other opinions on this?

Can't really go wrong with any of those bikes!

Just to confuse matters further I would certainly take the new all carbon LeMond frames into consideration. They are sweet, very laterally stiff and vertically compliant.

Mind you, in the end fit is by far the most important factor

Have you thought about the Extreme Power? Built for strong riders, great attention to paint work and craftmanship will also get you laid everywhere you go!

the extreme power is a great bike, but i dont think it is worth twice as much as the others. I think the fit and finish of the Look to be better than the BMC. I also think as far as stiffness goes, the "ultra" version of the look 585 or 595 is every bit as stiff as the BMC pro or team machine, but is more vert compliant, so should be a more comfortable ride. I had a similar debate, and ended up going with the 585 ultra. should be in early next week. can't wait.

I think the fit and finish of the Look to be better than the BMC. I also think as far as stiffness goes, the "ultra" version of the look 585 or 595 is every bit as stiff as the BMC pro or team machine, but is more vert compliant, so should be a more comfortable ride. I had a similar debate, and ended up going with the 585 ultra. should be in early next week.
Fit and finish on Looks (from what I've seen) appears to me to compare favorably to the other brands I've owned or tested, although it lacks the sizzle of some of the hand-made Italian rides. I usually go through bikes more often than I cut my toenails, but I plan on keeping my Looks for a long time.

[QUOTE=the seamus]All due respect, I wouldn't worry too much about the warranty thing. Look into your Pinarellos, Colnagos, Look and the majority of elite EU builders and they all have comparatively short warranties. It should not be taken as an indication of the quality, strength or durability of the product. I believe the laws in the EU are different and they aren't really allowed to offer the lifetime warranties we know and love here in North America. But I could be wrong about that.

Wrong...My Time VSXRS Ulteam has a lifetime warranty. Great bike too.

[QUOTE=the seamus]All due respect, I wouldn't worry too much about the warranty thing. Look into your Pinarellos, Colnagos, Look and the majority of elite EU builders and they all have comparatively short warranties. It should not be taken as an indication of the quality, strength or durability of the product. I believe the laws in the EU are different and they aren't really allowed to offer the lifetime warranties we know and love here in North America. But I could be wrong about that.

Wrong...My Time VSXRS Ulteam has a lifetime warranty. Great bike too.