New Second Frame - Paris Carb. or C50?

[oldguy00]

If you were building a second bike to go with your Serotta, and you had to choose between the Pinarello Paris Carbon, and a Colnago C50, which and why??? Thanks!

[Climb01742]

c50 has history. folks have great things to say about both. but for me, the racing history of the c50 gives it a certain flair.

also, which fits you better? which colors do you like better?

[Lanternrouge]

Assuming both fit, I'd go with the Paris carbon because it's less common and has nicer curves. One thing is that you have to use Campy with a Pinarello or else it just looks wrong. You could go either way with a Colnago.

[Elefantino]

If I were going to buy a Paris or a C50 as my second frame I'd buy them both, because if they are my second frames then money would be no object.

If I had to pick one, though, I'd echo Climb and pick the one that fit me best.

[Steelhead]

Thats a tough one - I would lean toward the C50 but some of their paint jobs are a little too much for me. A C50 with a relatively mild paint job would get the order from me.

[Steelhead]

You could always solve this debate by getting a De Rosa !

[Too Tall]

C50, a great handling / riding bike by all accounts. It's about the ride.

[catulle]

I have a good friend who has been the national cycling champ several times and still travels to Italy every summer for a month to train and race. He owns Pinarello because where he goes in Italy is close to the Pinarello factory and buys his frames at a small retail store owned and managed by the Pinarello people. Having said that, he drools over my Colnago bicycles and wants to buy my C-40 because I hardly ever ride it anymore. He says that he rides Pinarello only because of his personal relation to the people at the factory.

By the way, although I have a C-50 in red (and I'm certainly not crazy about the paint scheme), when I ordered my C-40 I asked for a custom paint job from the factory and got it. The frame is solid blue with white decals and I think it looks like a million bucks.

In short, for me it's a nobrainer: C-50.

[sspielman]

To borrow a phrase from the immortal Roy D. Mercer, "How big a boy are ya?"
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. As mentioned in an earlier post, The DeRosa King, King XL, or Protos are great candidates in a similar vein.....and for superbe quality with a little extra cache, the Carrera Estremo would be about right (and is available custom)...

[stevep]

c-50
hands down.

[Delpo]

C50 if it fits you well. You can custom paint to your heart's desire if you order through CBIKE. IMHO the C50 is the smoothest, fastest, production bike out there.

Delpo

[catulle]

You can order custom paint from for Colnago from any of the dealers.

[oldguy00]

If I were going to buy a Paris or a C50 as my second frame I'd buy them both, because if they are my second frames then money would be no object.

If I had to pick one, though, I'd echo Climb and pick the one that fit me best.


I didn't mean to imply that it would be my rain bike.... :)
No, I can't afford both, I wish I could. I think the Pina I would be a 51.5.

The C50, it's either a '53' or a '54'. My saddle height from center of BB to top of saddle is about 73.5cm. The top tube length on the 53 (and the Pina 51.5) is probably better for me, but I think I would need just over an inch of spacers above the headset, so not sure if that is bad......

The 54 nago would only require about 1.5cm of spacers, but I would be a little bit stretched out with a 110 stem on it, which isn't that long to begin with........hmmmmmmmm.....

In the Pina, I admit to being a big fan of the IB team color. With the nago, I like some of the more basic colors, like PR00.

Expert fitters - help!

PS. What about the Extreme C (not the Extreme Power)? Is it less durable than the C50, meant for lighter riders?

[Delpo]

You can order custom paint from for Colnago from any of the dealers.

Thank you for the clarification. Did not mean to imply that CBIKE was the only one, it was the one that I could vouch for since I bought through them.

Delpo

[oldguy00]

To borrow a phrase from the immortal Roy D. Mercer, "How big a boy are ya?"
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. As mentioned in an earlier post, The DeRosa King, King XL, or Protos are great candidates in a similar vein.....and for superbe quality with a little extra cache, the Carrera Estremo would be about right (and is available custom)...

173 pounds, 5'9.5"
Not interested in a DeRosa.....just personal preference, no real reason.

[yim]

Our Asian champion said that he prefers c40 over c50.

Why not consider extreme C?

[oldguy00]

Our Asian champion said that he prefers c40 over c50.

Why not consider extreme C?

See one of my replies above. I -am- wondering what kind of rider the Extreme C was meant for. Wondering if I'm a bit too heavy for one.

[Climb01742]

PS. What about the Extreme C (not the Extreme Power)? Is it less durable than the C50, meant for lighter riders?

i found the extreme c didn't handle rough pavement very well. it is very light but i didn't think it's ride was exceptional. an r3 is just as light but seemed to be more effective at turning power into speed/acceleration. extreme c falls victim, IMO, to something a number of light carbon do: to become light, the ride seems to get overly stiff and "jumpy", meaning when it hits bad road, it bounces around a lot.

[Jack Brunk]

Oldguy,

Based on your height and weight, isn't the sizes you mentioned a little small. It seems your a half inch shorter than me and I ride 55-56cm sized frames. I have both frames and you cannot go wrong with either one. Both will do everything that your looking for in a ride. Choose the one that your heart tells you to. I agree with climb on the extreme C. It's a realy nice bike but not quite stiff enough in the BB area. It was however a great decending bike.

[oldguy00]

Oldguy,

Based on your height and weight, isn't the sizes you mentioned a little small. It seems your a half inch shorter than me and I ride 55-56cm sized frames. I have both frames and you cannot go wrong with either one. Both will do everything that your looking for in a ride. Choose the one that your heart tells you to. I agree with climb on the extreme C. It's a realy nice bike but not quite stiff enough in the BB area. It was however a great decending bike.

What is your saddle height, from center of bb to top of saddle?? I'm only 73.5 cm (rocket7's and Look Keo's partly responsible....low stack).
I've always found that a 53.5 - 54 top tube is about right for me, allows me to use a 110 stem. I've stood over a 54 'nago top tube before, in my cycling shoes, and while it wasn't pushing up into me, I didn't really have any clearance. I'm not sure what my inseam measurement is, but again, 73.5 bb - saddle, and wear a 32" pant leg in jeans.. :)

[Jack Brunk]

What is your saddle height, from center of bb to top of saddle?? I'm only 73.5 cm (rocket7's and Look Keo's partly responsible....low stack).
I've always found that a 53.5 - 54 top tube is about right for me, allows me to use a 110 stem. I've stood over a 54 'nago top tube before, in my cycling shoes, and while it wasn't pushing up into me, I didn't really have any clearance. I'm not sure what my inseam measurement is, but again, 73.5 bb - saddle, and wear a 32" pant leg in jeans.. :)

My inseam is 87cm. I always use a 120-130mm length stems on all my bikes. If you wear a 32 jean your PBH should be around 33 or 34. Your 73.5 cm seems low for your leg length.

[FlaRider]

Oldguy -I've never owned a Colnago but have owned some very nice carbon bikes, including Time, Parlee and Calfee. I currently own a Paris Carbon and love it. Try to test ride both frames and then buy the one that speaks to you. You probably can't go wrong with either, though.

[catulle]

Pinarello, Colnago, Campagnolo, Shimano, red or blue, that's all fine and debatable. Contact points, that's something else. That's on the black box.

[oldguy00]

My inseam is 87cm. I always use a 120-130mm length stems on all my bikes. If you wear a 32 jean your PBH should be around 33 or 34. Your 73.5 cm seems low for your leg length.

I'll try to measure my PBH tonight. I can tell you that a couple years ago when I switched from Carnac/Shimano/Sidi to R7's and from Look PP396's to keos, my saddle height dropped a good 2cm...

[Grant McLean]

What is your saddle height, from center of bb to top of saddle?? I'm only 73.5 cm (rocket7's and Look Keo's partly responsible....low stack).
I've always found that a 53.5 - 54 top tube is about right for me, allows me to use a 110 stem. I've stood over a 54 'nago top tube before, in my cycling shoes, and while it wasn't pushing up into me, I didn't really have any clearance.

I was going to say the same thing as Jack, but since i've never seen you on
a bike, I don't really know what you look like on it.

I'm 5'7", saddle height 69.5 and I ride the 53 c40 with an 11cm stem. I could
easily ride the 54 too.

g

[Grant McLean]

i found the extreme c didn't handle rough pavement very well. it is very light but i didn't think it's ride was exceptional. an r3 is just as light but seemed to be more effective at turning power into speed/acceleration. extreme c falls victim, IMO, to something a number of light carbon do: to become light, the ride seems to get overly stiff and "jumpy", meaning when it hits bad road, it bounces around a lot.

Climb, did you ride a std geometry or a compact one? I hear sloping is better :)
But seriously, where would you rank the Extreme, you're still hot on the TIME
and what else? Have you tried the R3? I was underwhelmed with that one
in our size...


g

[Climb01742]

Climb, did you ride a std geometry or a compact one? I hear sloping is better :)
But seriously, where would you rank the Extreme, you're still hot on the TIME
and what else? Have you tried the R3? I was underwhelmed with that one
in our size...


g

grant, it was standard geo. the r3 had great performance but it's ride was just too harsh for me. the extreme c wasn't_as_harsh as the r3 but its performance wasn't as good either, IMO. the time vxrs has been the best balance for me of performance and ride quality. i have a king xl custom in the works. have high hopes for that. many of the carbon bikes i've ridden have sacrificed ride quality to get performance. for me these days that just isn't a trade off i wanna make. getting old, i guess. :rolleyes: i spend most of my rides on the time or my love #3.

[sspielman]

As a data point.... I also have a sadlle height of 73.5 cm.....I am 5'9.5". On the c50, It would be a toss up between the 54 and 55 (C to T). If I got the 54, i would be using a 120 stem. Of course this all means very little without a specific comparo of body dimensions, but I think OG is in the ballpark

[catulle]

Again, I disagree. I think it is wrong to infer contact points only from physical dimensions. I believe that's the flaw of most so-called "fitting systems". They sit you on a bicycle-like contraption, take some measurements which are fed to the computer, and the result are the contact points where you must fit. No, I don't think that's the way it works in real life.

A man 5'9" with 32" inseam and thin legs, will have different contact points than a man 5'9" with 32" inseam, thick legs and fifteen years older. The saddle to bb travel will not be the same. The frame may or may not be the same, though. The bicycle frame size might not be too difficult to figure out. The contact points are.

It is different to ride a bicycle to the corner store to buy bread every day than to ride three and four hours a day on a regular basis. More so if you plan to work on your times and so on. You need to spend a lot of time on the saddle, on different frames, with different contact points, on the ROAD, before you can get an idea of what may be your contact points for a comfortable position on the saddle when riding for an hour or more.

Just saying, atmo...

[oldguy00]

How about this for a hypothetical question...

If you had to choose between two sizes on the Paris, which of these scenarios would be better:

51.5 c-c, 53.5 TT, 115mm stem, 1.5 inches of spacers under stem, some standover clearance.

53 c-c, 54.5 TT, 105mm stem, .5 inches of spacers under stem, no standover clearance- tt pushes into you when standing over.

[oldguy00]

How about this for a hypothetical question...

If you had to choose between two sizes on the Paris, which of these scenarios would be better:

51.5 c-c, 53.5 TT, 115mm stem, 1.5 inches of spacers under stem, some standover clearance.

53 c-c, 54.5 TT, 105mm stem, .5 inches of spacers under stem, no standover clearance- tt pushes into you when standing over.

I guess its partly an asthetics thing...both would -work-. Do I want less spacers and my seatpost pushed way into the frame and a shorter stem, or more spacers, longer stem, more post showing. I guess maybe the handling would feel slightly different with the different stem lengths..

[Jack Brunk]

What stem angle are you going to use?

[TimD]

You'll also want to consider the amount of seatpost showing and the saddle - to - bar drop.

BikeCAD may be of help here...

[oldguy00]

What stem angle are you going to use?

Figure a deda newton, I believe an 84 degree.

[oldguy00]

You'll also want to consider the amount of seatpost showing and the saddle - to - bar drop.

BikeCAD may be of help here...

True, I might try BikeCad.

I'm not sure of the saddle to bar drop right off hand, I'll try to measure my current tonight, but it wouldn't really matter, would it? I mean, I'd keep the same regrdless of frame size, just one frame would require more spacers under the stem than the other...

[coylifut]

i'd go for the nago just because i've always wanted one and I like the head-badge/decal. not the best of reasons, but hey we're talking bikes here, who needs to be rational.

[Spicoli]

How about this for a hypothetical question...

If you had to choose between two sizes on the Paris, which of these scenarios would be better:

51.5 c-c, 53.5 TT, 115mm stem, 1.5 inches of spacers under stem, some standover clearance.

53 c-c, 54.5 TT, 105mm stem, .5 inches of spacers under stem, no standover clearance- tt pushes into you when standing over.

I guess its partly an asthetics thing...both would -work-. Do I want less spacers and my seatpost pushed way into the frame and a shorter stem, or more spacers, longer stem, more post showing. I guess maybe the handling would feel slightly different with the different stem lengths..
Uh Oh! I think the "Jerk" needs to get involved in this thread pronto!

Longer stem is ALWAYS BETTER! IMO! :hello:

[chrisroph]

the smaller of the two.

[vaxn8r]

Figure a deda newton, I believe an 84 degree.
Deda is an 82 deg IIRC

[1centaur]

Deda is an 82 deg IIRC

All but the Magic at 80.

[oldguy00]

Hi all, I was thinking of throwing a couple more frames into the possibilities....

Look 585 and Time VXRS. Assuming I could get the VXRS for about the same price as a C50...

One thing about the VXRS is that it has a 73 degree seat angle, as opposed to the 73.5 - 74 angle of the other frames...
Does this really matter? I guess it means that the saddle would need to be pushed 5-10mm forward on the seatpost....
So -if- 74 degree is your ideal.....if you have shortish femurs....is it dumb to buy a frame with a 73 degree seat angle, or does it really not matter??

Oh, I figure I'd fit on a 'small' vxrs and a '53' in the 585...

[jimcav]

have ridden all but the paris carbon. i am selling most of my bikes, and before i do i am building up a paris carbon (2006) to decide what will be my carbon keeper.
this is subjective of course, but i have the vxrs, the 585 team white, c50 hp and a c40 hp. you can't really go wrong.
have to wait on the paris carbon, but the 585 and vxrs are nearly identical in performance to me. I'd say the vxrs is a hair lighter and stiffer, but at the same time is comfortable. similarly, the 585 is simply a great all around bike, light, stiff, comfortable enough to ride for hours (although my longest ride on it is 3 hours). the c40 HP to me is the most comfortable, then the c50. the c50 is slightly stiffer, and both do not handle as quickly as the vxrs or 585.

also, i think there is much more cutting edge design and use of carbon. here i give the edge to the vxrs--everything is shaped, asymetric stays, etc. the 585 is more subtle but still they are working the carbon. the colnago is like my 1995 c40, they made it simpler to build with the b-stay and have added the HP stays, but it is essentially the same lugged design--no reason to mess much with it, it is a great bike.

anyway, i like the look of the paris carbon--if i keep mine i will someday paint it white--i like the curves. sets it apart.

paint aside based on the technology, design, ride, handling i rank them:
vxrs, 585, c40 hp, c50 hp, PARIS ???? (last b/c i have yet to ride it)

good luck with your decision (and sorry mine are all 55-56 TT or you could get 2 for the price of one new)

jim

[Climb01742]

vxrs is my fav.