Look 695 frame sets.
 

Whats your opinions on "look" bicycles. their quality, their prices, and overall experiences with them.http://bikeforums.net/attachment.php...hmentid=223387http://bikeforums.net/attachment.php...hmentid=223388

You gotta have a boat load of cash to get one and they look fricken awesome. I have 0 experience with them so yeah.....I can't tell you anything of importance.

They are that expensive?

Their track frame is something like 8K

wow thats pushing the price of the Venge.

The 695 frameset (with crank and stem) costs $5,500. Here is a link to some of their frames and prices.

http://www.wrenchscience.com/road/Frames/Look/

5-7 grand for the 695. The Mondrian edition is sweet!
http://www.racycles.com/product.aspx...,2570&pid=4877
I love the cranks!

There's got to be a heck of a profit margin on that.

probably not because there probably isn't a ton of volume to help make back the fixed costs associated with designing and building a high quality carbon fiber frame.

I have a 595 Ultra. Awesome bike to say the least. Would buy it again in a heartbeat if given the chance. One of the best bikes made without a doubt. Too bad they discontinued that model to be followed by the 695. I hate the fact that to get a 695 you pay for the darn crank and pedals I would personally have no use for. I really like the concept of the stem, despite it being ugly as heck. If it came with the choice to get ride of the integrated crank and pedals I would consider it for my next build.

Now, there is not a single thing wrong with the crank or pedals. Actually, they have gotten pretty good reviews. I just like the Campagnolo cranks better and run other brand pedals.

I basically steer away from bikes with an integrated seat post. A couple of reasons...I like to cock my saddle to the left-ous a bit and a non round post precludes this...and I don't like the idea of cutting the mast. This is an issue with many new higher end frames with integrated seat posts...don't get it for the amateur rider in particular.
Also, as you mention, integrated cranks are a very slippery slope and mfr's are going this way to sell more product...plain and simple...not unlike the integrated post.
That said, Look was a pioneer in CF and to me make one of the best CF frames in world. I ride a 2006 Look 555 which has been flawless...a perfect blend of compliance and stiffness for me...and a great value frame. I wouldn't spend more than $2500-$3K for a frameset and won't be therefore getting a Look 6 series which no doubt is outstanding. The other thing is...Look with its French heritage has almost an Italian element of design to it...their frames are artfully sculpted.

I've got a 585 Optimum frameset which I built up, and it's awesome. If you can afford the 695 and it's what you need, go for it! Then again, if you want to try a Look at a lower price point and can fit a medium, another option is here. They've also got a large and an XL 595 in Cofidis team colors.

I've heard that Look and Time frames tend to be a bit noodly - is that true?

Check out Look frames on Ebay. Like most other makes, they depreciate like crazy and you can get a good deal on a NOS or used one.

Definitely not true.

Look is without a doubt my favorite bicycle company. Everything from the ride to the aesthetics to the French heritage makes me :love:. Not to mention all the pioneering and innovating they have done in the cycling world. Clipless road pedals are just one example, but these guys have pushed the technology envelope like crazy considering they are a relatively new to the bicycle industry (they started out making ski gear). It's just satisfying knowing they hand make all their bikes in their own French factory rather than outsourcing to Taiwan like everyone else.

I would never get rid of my Look 595. It's my favorite bike design of all time and I think it's unfortunate Look discontinued it and replaced it with the 695 as the new flagship model. IMO they should have kept the 595/585 as the mid-range model and scrapped the newer monocoque 586.

FYI, check the link in my sig if you are interested in a NOS 555.

I've never ridden a 695, but I've spent some time on various 595s and it was like riding a jackhammer. Super stiff and super fast, but one of the least comfortable frames I've ever been on

If you want French boutique you should also check out Cyfac. I have a Cyfac and love it.

Absolutely LOVE my Look.

- Z

Rode and raced a 695 this season. No complaints. I have the SR version and it is not noodly at all - in fact it's the opposite - the frame is super stiff, but the epost rubber inserts insulate you so the ride does not feel harsh. Rode (and still ride) a Look KG481sl for many years and the ride is similar except there is more notable flex in the BB area on the older Look. Not 100% sure, but I think you can buy the frame only (wout cranks, pedals or stem).

Joe

I have a 586 and it is the nicest riding frame set I have ever owned (Cervelo, Storck etc). I'd like to give a 695 a try to feel the difference between models. But I'm afraid if I did that I would want to get one after the ride :)
Here's one of the cheapest places to get a new Look 695 (other than ebay): http://www.bellatisport.com/look.html

No offense to Rippin or anyone else that likes their 586, but this is my least favorite of all the Look road bikes. IMHO it lacks the flair and sex appeal of all their other bikes. The lugged construction of the 585 and 595 is just beautiful. You get the classic lugged look with state of the art technology and performance kind of like what Colnago does with their EPQ/C59. The 695 is a stunning monocoque design and the integrated I-pack system is great IMO. Then we have the 586. It just seems out of place. They already have the 566 which is a lower-end (price wise) monocoque design, so I don't get the need for the mid-range monocoque 586. The market is already saturated with similar designs. IMHO Look should have the 566 at the lower end, 585/595 (depending on what kind of seatpost you want) at the mid-high end, and then the flagship 695. I've actually thought about writing Look a letter requesting a re-release of the 595, but I know I'd just be wasting my time. I just hope mine lasts forever!

I agree that the 586 may not have the sex appeal of a lugged carbon frame, but it does have other aesthetic appeal. The smooth contours and transitions from tube to tube and the (relatively) small diameter tubing gives the frame a nice classical look to it, similar to a nicely fillet-brazed steel frame. And remember, the 586 has been out for some time now (since 2008) and has remained basically unchanged since its introduction. There are several ISP frames that may look similar to the 586, but the 586 was one of the first. It wouldn't surprise me if it undergoes a change in the near future. After riding aggressive carbon frames I wanted something with a little less bite and the 586 was designed with that in mind.
For the most demanding rider, Look had the 595, but now that has been replaced with the (basically) lugless 695. So actually I think their lineup is more homologized now as there are no more lugged frames.

You do bring up an important point here: The seat mast. While you and I may never realize the difference or benefit from it, it does add significant stiffness to the bike. However, they are not created equal either. Many bikes out that have seat mast do it simply for the marketing value and not because it adds anything to their bikes. In fact, few actually do based on design. LOOK, TIME, and Trek (I know, I know...) are some of the few that do. Most others do not based on reviews and testing. Most people that do not like these is because they feel it will limit their re-sale of the frame given they plan to use it for a short time. These are the same people that will not think twice to cut their steering tube as if it does not do the same to some extent. I look at frames and bikes like I look at shoes when I am buying some. I want them to fit me comfortably, I want them to look good, I want them to work very well, and I want them to last me for a long long time. Resale does not enter my mind int hat regard, but that is just me.

That could not be further form the truth. These things are very well known in fact for being the definition of stiffness, performance, and responsiveness. Soft and plush comfort is not their main goal, so they are not the most comfortable bikes necessarily.

That is not depreciation. The prices you see on NOS on ebay are the reflection of retail cost minus profit margin. That is closer to what the store was paying for when they got it. The same goes for just about any bike, but it is more noticeable in the higher end bikes.


Not to be argumentative, but LOOK frames are actually made in Tunisia, not France. I do agree with you in that they should have gotten rid of the 586 and kept the 595. Heck, I wished they would have made the 695 a lugged frame instead and then get rid of the 595!!

I've had mine for a few years and rode it with the red elastomer (medium softness) the entire time until about 6 months ago when for the heck of it I tried the gray colored elastomer (considered the soft one). Up until then, I would have agreed with your statement. Very harsh for long rides. I was OK on it until about 80 miles or 4 hr. My ass would feel like someone took a baseball bat to my taint regardless of tires, tire pressures, and wheels. Cannot say the same now. Night and day difference. I just can't believe I was so stupid as to never try this before.