Look 586?

[a4racer]

Ahoy there, I'm happily riding my Look 585 Team. Love the ride, one of the best road bikes I've owned! The fit--just slightly off. I may be able to play around with it, and make it work perfectly, but for now, for the riding I'm doing, it is just about right.

Q: I'm always on the hunt, and as such, I am presently looking at a Look 586. I'm not as familiar with the Look lines as I am with other manufacturers--how does (did) the 586 slot into their lineup--it has an integrated post with what I think is a pretty interesting elastomer / spacer set up for adjustability.

Thanks for your input!!!

[reggiebaseball]

The 586 was their monocoque frame
After the 585 was supplanted in the peloton by the 595 (which is similarly lugged carbon, made in France, with the addition of an ISP)

Then Look released the 586 as a climbing bike for lighter riders. Production is monocoque (rather than lugged, resulting in a 200gram weight savings give or take) and was done in Taiwan.

The seatpost elastomer system works well for dampening vibration, but offers LESS flexibility than your current 585 with seatpost would. Once you cut the ISP in the 586 to length you have a few CMs of adjustability up or down.

The 586 would be less desireable if you are over 170# - it suits lighter riders better.

If you are having fit issues on the 585, then the 586 is not going to make those any better for you

What size frame you you ride?

[kramnnim]

I've owned a 586 for a while, rode it nearly 30,000 miles.

The frames were made in Tunisia in Look's factory. I believe the 585s were also made there.

I also owned a 585, rode it over 10,000 miles. The 586 is more comfortable, if anything. (as far as eating up road vibrations)

When you factor in the weight of the Epost, the frames are comparable in weight, assuming you use the Look Ergopost in the 585.

The don't know why someone who weighs 170 pounds or more would need to avoid the 586 any more than they would a 585, it is not any more fragile or flimsy.

[a4racer]

The 586 was their monocoque frame
After the 585 was supplanted in the peloton by the 595 (which is similarly lugged carbon, made in France, with the addition of an ISP)

Then Look released the 586 as a climbing bike for lighter riders. Production is monocoque (rather than lugged, resulting in a 200gram weight savings give or take) and was done in Taiwan.

The seatpost elastomer system works well for dampening vibration, but offers LESS flexibility than your current 585 with seatpost would. Once you cut the ISP in the 586 to length you have a few CMs of adjustability up or down.

The 586 would be less desireable if you are over 170# - it suits lighter riders better.

If you are having fit issues on the 585, then the 586 is not going to make those any better for you

What size frame you you ride?

I'm riding an XL 585 presently, and am a healthy toddler in weight more than 170 pounds!

[reggiebaseball]

I had an XXL 595, and I didn't like it because the geometry was not appropriate for me (and IMO not for large riders). It's like they kept the same geometry ideas from a S/M frame and maintained them - but that doesnt always work for big guys IMO.

The 586 geo is the same and therefore the bike will be no better than your 585,

I would try two tactics

1. experiment with frames from different manufacturers that have different geometry if you dont like your position on the Look, maybe something built around a slacker ST.

2. experiment with changes to things like handlebarsbars (to increase or decrease reach) or stem length (which can impact how twitchy the front end may feel), or the number of spacers beneath your stem (if you are getting pain because your bars are too low) etc. in order to perfect your position on the Look 585 you have, which is a very nice frame indeed.

[happycampyer]

What about the fit of the 585 is slightly off? The geometry of Look's road bikes (585, 595, etc.) is pretty neutral, at least in the M, L and XL sizes. If the frame has too much drop, you might want to check out the "Optimum" versions of the frames, which had a less racy geometry, but were still race bikes.

Agree with others that if the 585 doesn't fit quite right, the 586 will be no better. At one point I read Look's explanation of the various numbers in its product line (x00, 0x0, 00x), and it was more complicated than Assos' nomenclature.

[mistermo]

I had an XXL 595, and I didn't like it because the geometry was not appropriate for me (and IMO not for large riders).

I have a LOOK 585 Ultra in XXL. Geo works fine for me.

[Jase]

I've had a 586sl for a couple of years. I weigh 72kgs, produce average or less power. Haven't warmed to it. The rear end feels squirmy at times and bb doesn't feel stiff. In saying that, it is comfortable, more so than my past TCR and supersix, but not as comfy as my steel IF FLW. I'm looking at selling it as the IF will be my plush bike and I'll replace the look for something more racy.

[a4racer]

What about the fit of the 585 is slightly off? The geometry of Look's road bikes (585, 595, etc.) is pretty neutral, at least in the M, L and XL sizes. If the frame has too much drop, you might want to check out the "Optimum" versions of the frames, which had a less racy geometry, but we're still race bikes.

Agree with others that if the 585 doesn't fit quite right, the 586 will be no better. At one point I read Look's explanation of the various numbers in its product line (x00, 0x0, 00x), and it was more complicated than Assos' nomenclature.

The fit is something of my own doing--the steerer of the fork is a touch short, and I decided to pair that with a Ritchey Monocurve handlebar, which a) prevents me from playing with the rise and b) prevents me from rotating the bars up a touch.

As a result, aesthetics (misguided) have put me in too low a position up front. I've finally realized this, and have ordered a separate bar and stem which will permit me a little more rise in the stem, and also a bit of rotation in the bars...hopefully this will make this bike fit me just that much better--I really do love it!!!