Look Frames

In article <gX0hb.710480$Ho3.157237@sccrnsc03>,

D.P.G. said:

Does anyone have any comments on the Look KG486 or KG386 frames. I have never seen anything
posted on them.

I find it interesting that they appear to weigh about a pound more than similar competitors products
such as Trek, Colnago, Calfee, etc.

--Paul

In article <[email hidden]>, Paul Southworth

Quoted message said:

I find it interesting that they appear to weigh about a pound more than similar competitors
products such as Trek, Colnago, Calfee, etc.

Perhaps because Look frames are usually sold (and weighed) with the fork?

In article said:

In article <[email hidden]>, Paul Southworth

Quoted message said:

I find it interesting that they appear to weigh about a pound more than similar competitors
products such as Trek, Colnago, Calfee, etc.

Perhaps because Look frames are usually sold (and weighed) with the fork?

Hmm, that makes it not so interesting. :-)

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by Paul Southworth

BIn article said:

In article <[email hidden]>, Paul Southworth

Quoted message said:

I find it interesting that they appear to weigh about a pound more than similar competitors
products such as Trek, Colnago, Calfee, etc.

Perhaps because Look frames are usually sold (and weighed) with the fork?

Hmm, that makes it not so interesting. :-) [/B]

That would put the look frame at the same weight as the other frames you mentioned, so that's not bad. I guess if those frames are good enough for several tour teams they should be ok. I know that Jenson has the KG361 on sale and the only difference between it and the KG381 is that the Carbon on the 381 has been weaved to make it stronger, but they make it varying thickness with a thinner section to make it lighter, so it ends but being no stronger than the 361 frame and about 100 grams lighter. So you pay $1000 more for 100 grams less.

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>, Paul Southworth

Quoted message said:

I find it interesting that they appear to weigh about a pound more than similar competitors
products such as Trek, Colnago, Calfee, etc.

Perhaps because Look frames are usually sold (and weighed) with the fork?

You've got it backwards. Look's site (lookcyclesusa.comf kg486.htmOpen ↗) gives the weight for
the combined frame & fork, and they are sold together. The Calfee site is frame-only for weights.
The Colnago site (colnago.comframes.htmlOpen ↗) shows most as frame only,
with no weights that I could find. The Trek site shows a few framests (most are complete bikes), but
I couldn't find any weights.

I'd like to know what the Look names mean. They aren't the weights.

Jay Hill said:

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>, Paul Southworth

Quoted message said:

I find it interesting that they appear to weigh about a pound more than similar competitors
products such as Trek, Colnago, Calfee, etc.

Perhaps because Look frames are usually sold (and weighed) with the fork?

You've got it backwards. Look's site

Doh! You've got it right. Mea culpa.