OK, before you all start in, yes, I have more money than talent. That being said, I have an order with my LBS for a felt DA. The LBS owner has a one year old Look 496 with HED aerobars, Zipp 999 wheels, Campy brakes, DA components, and an FSA Chainring for a little over 2K less. Comments???
Look, no doubt. and I own 2 Felts, but the new one is ugly IMHO
Hmm, better wheels, equivalent components, a $4k frameset new, available now. If the Look has relatively low miles I’d bite.
Agree with others - for just over $2000( if that is the price) then the Look is the way to go if it fits you. The only knock on the 496 is that it’s a bit heavier than its competition( very top end TT/Triathlon frames) and the seat angle is standard road( about 73 degrees)
Fleck
Personally, I’d wait for the DA. The look is not a very stiff bike and the DA is very stiff and is one of the most aerodynamic bikes ever built, not to mention that the 05 look was a Tank. The look has a 75 degree seatpost and the DA is a 2 position post capable of 78 degrees. The Zipp bar is more adjustable and as aero as the hed. The 999 wheels are the fastest wheel set on the planet in the right conditions, but the right conditions may not occur every race day. With practice the 808’s, the second fastest wheel set on the planet can be ridden in anything less than gale force winds. Oh yeah, Jim Felt made his bones on steering geometry so I’d make a wager that the Felt will handle better.
Just my opinion,
Scott
Forget the DA, the new B2 is every bit as good and aero at a price that is much more reasonable, whether money is an issue or not. I spent a lot of time looking at both bikes and the DA is really more marketing than technology, IMHO.
Regards,
How big are you? The 496 only goes up to medium and it’s a completely different philosophy geometrically. Not really comparable bikes apart from both having a hinged front end.
I ride a 54, so the medium frame is fine. The Look seems plenty stiff with great acceleration out of corners, The seat angle on the 496 is 76 and I can get the seat forward on the rails to about 78. The weight is what bugs me most about the Look, but I am not sure that really even matters. Ride mostly flats to rolling hills in windy conditions. Thanks for all the input.
If money is not an issue than buy what you want. if 2 grand to youis meaningful buy the Look. Sounds like an awesome price! You can alway resale it in a year for a few hundred less.
Use the extra $$$ for a powertap 
I don’t believe that the Felt DA has a hinged front end.
Styrrell
So how much exactly is the price of the Look? 2k less is still in the $3-4000 region right? Seems quite a lot for a second hand bike that is not light by any standards, and not particularly aero either. But if the geometry suits you…
Thanks for all the input. Scott, greatly appreciate your input as you seem like an experienced wrench. Think I’ll keep waitin’.
http://www.feltracing.com/tech/DA_B2.asp
moving the steerer outside the frame is closer to hinged than standard designs
.
For you they are quite similar. The 54 felt is very close in sizing, it does have ~12mm more front centre and will more easily allow riding forward but if you can achieve your position on either bike it doesnt matter.
My preference would be the felt 
But the steerer tube isn’t “outside the frame”. The only thing different about the headtube area that I can see, is that the fork has a piece that fairs the headtube. If you put a conventional fork on the frame (which you can do) then the front end is normal. I’m not saying that the design is bad at all, but I fail to see why they didn’t go with a frame with a nosecone and normal fork versus putting the nosecone on the fork.
styrrell
, but I fail to see why they didn’t go with a frame with a nosecone and normal fork versus putting the nosecone on the fork.
styrrell
It’s called “point of difference” - helps the marketing no end. Those who dont see the point can get the B2, if you like it “hinged” the DA is the way to go
Thats my point, they seemed to have designed the front end more for marketing than engineering. It seems to me that they could have used a frame nose cone much easiesr than a fork nose cone. The CdA would be the same and replacement forks would be more available.
Styrrell,
Nosecones are illegal, as are aspect (chord) ratios greater than 3:1. With the fork ahead of the frame, Felt could make the frame push the envelope of “legal” cross section, then add to it and be within the UCI rules yet see a 5:1 shape. The stiffness is another issue, we are almost 60% stiffer than the 1.125" ALUMINUM steerer tubes in torsional deflection and 25% greater in the bending plane along the tube.
-SD