I’ve been having a look at the Look 496, but must admit that the gap between the rear wheel and the frame concerns me. How much of an impact does this have on what otherwise seems to be a quite aerodynamic design? Has anyone seen any windtunnel numbers for this frame when compared to other frames? And with the front of the bike seeming very aerodynamic, does the possible issues at the rear matter enough to write it off?
I had one on trial for a while, and it was probably the best bike i’ve ever ridden. Not sure about the aero effect of the rear wheel gap, but just look at how many teams use it on the Track - it cant be that bad!! Just wish I could afford one!!
That said,it is the sexiest frame, but when built, turns into the ugliest bike!!
I have been riding a 496 tri for a year now and it is an awesome bike. If there is time lost due to the aero cut-out it is probably insignificant and more marketing and fashion than anyhting else. If it’s good enough for Luc Van Lierde, Thor Hushvold and Laurent Jalabert it’s good enough for me. You will not regret your choice. I get so many positive comments at every race that my bike is really nice. You won’t have troubles spotting it in the transition among all the cervelo’s.
derek
I’ve had one for about a year now. Its a great tri bike with almost endless position possibilities specially up front. Its built very well with no problems encountered so far. The main issue for me with this frame if ever is…WEIGHT. But if you’re strong, it would not matter.
If you want to set your seat the way I did by reversing the seatpost…although possible & allowed by Look, you will have a problem with the tilt. It can only go so much and a bit pointed up to my liking. I had to insert a bolt head in the binder, sort of like a cam to make my seat face down as in the picture. I’m not sure if Look already addressed this problem with a new post.
With regards to the rear wheel cut-out gap, i’m not fast enough to merit the probable advantages, but I made my own DIY solution to it. More of an aesthetics problem to me than a function. My mistake is, I had the fabricator make the fairing so close I can only use 22mm tires or smaller. Some 22mm brands even rub the fairing on standing efforts. Here was my thread on it before:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/cgi-bin/gforum.cgi?post=1517757;search_string=campled;#1517757
Its still basically the same frame for 2008 with a different color scheme. I am thinking of custom painting it like the Credit Agricole white combo scheme.
This is my current set-up for it.
Now that is pretty! 
Unfortunately I would be looking to use it for UCI-legal racing as well, and since the fill on the rear wheel would be seen as merely aerodynamic and not structural, I guess it would not be legal… 
Now that is pretty!
Unfortunately I would be looking to use it for UCI-legal racing as well, and since the fill on the rear wheel would be seen as merely aerodynamic and not structural, I guess it would not be legal…
Hollow it out and turn it into a place to store a toolkit, or a spare tire…or put a bladder in it and make it a water bottle
I like your thinking! 