Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

"last gen" superframe vs. current mid-tier
Quote | Reply
I'm looking at investing in a new TT frameset, and am narrowing down choices. The Trek SC7 looks great, really well thought out, and is near the top of what I have been looking at. However another option that is available to me is a new/old stock Look 596, which I would consider more of an analog to the SC 9 series.

A rough pro/con:

Trek SC 7.0:
+: Kamm tail frame design seems a step ahead of everything else
+: integrated options - draft box, speed box, duotrap - are genuinely useful and seem not insignificant in terms of aero benefit
+: middle-of-the-road sizing approach - will almost certainly fit without need for weird hacks
+: can fit my Quarq to BB90
+: frame stiffness reported to be very good
+: like the paint (both this and the 7.2)
-: minor hassle: would want to switch gruppo to already-owned Rival/Force (ideally LBS could do on initial build)
-: "basic" front end (fork/brake/bars) - switching to Use/Hed/3T bars would help this
-: I feel like the SC will be the P2C of yesteryear, i.e. dozens in transition

Look 596
+: top TT design from a top maker with a lot of engineering experience and resources
+: seems top of the heap for comfort - elastomer seat system
+: great look (ahem) to the frame
+: "bayonet" style integrated fork/headtube design
+: wider rear triangle and cutout should accommodate any wheel without issue
+: won't see too many of these around
+: ZED crank - seems like the best crank design, period
+: Trilobe pedals - can dial in crank length easily
-: ZED crank - would have to go to a Powertap or shim the BB for a traditional crank install, negating the benefit
-: Trilobe pedals - would need to go to Look pedals (not bad just would be a switch)
-: Ergostem seems too low or too high dependent on setting; traditional steerer stub available but not sure on its effective stack/reach

Haven't been able to source much comparative aero data on the 596; it certainly seems like Look did their homework on the frame but that's mostly from their own materials. Additionally it is approx. a three year old design, insofar as that even matters, but that does seem to show in items like the bent top tube and brake placements.

There's a plushness, for want of words, to the Look that is very appealing. But Trek's design seems to be such an incredible value, all things considered.

Anyone had the chance to test both?
Quote Reply