# The Look bike mods have begun



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

Folks who have been around me lately know I've been obsessing on this Look bike I'm current using. Forget 29ers. Forget the Nomad. It's all about carbon... for now. Out of my last nine rides, nine have been on this bike. Perhaps the next nine too.

Today was bike tuner day and it's time to mess with the loaner bike. Old weight is 20.94 with Candy SLs. New weight is 18.07 without pedals. I'm waiting on the new 200 gram Look pedals which should be here soon.




Key changes are saddle, riser bar, XTR cassette, and Pace rigid fork.

And now I have the option of a 69er bike with a 29er wheel on the front. Although this is the wrong fork and it's a bit tall. I need more parts.

More changes are coming I think. Singlespeed, Oro Puro brakes, carbon wheels, helium, drilling holes.


Last month, I lived and breathed the 33 lb. Nomad and said weight doesn't matter. This week, I'm shaving grams. Ahh cyling.




fc


----------



## mpap89 (Mar 10, 2005)

there's a lot more weight to be saved. crankset, front derailleur, seat, wheelset to name a few. please give us a review of the pedals when you get them.


----------



## sabresix (Dec 24, 2006)

It looks freakin' awesome!


----------



## J.Mc. (Aug 24, 2007)

:eekster: Thats gotta be one of the sweetest looking bikes i've ever seen. Friggin awesome! Sure there is plenty of weight that u could drop but for me personally 18lbs is light enough. Damn it man! Now i want a look frame. My hats off to ya even though i am a little jealous


----------



## RockStarRacing (Dec 30, 2006)

i have a friend who is (thinking of) doing the same to a scott scale LTD, pace 440mm rc31ti forks to keep the front end the same with a 29er front wheel, he is aiming at around 14-15lbs!


----------



## Cranked (Jun 1, 2006)

Love it! Look really nailed it with this bike, if I was looking for a carbon hard tail this would be it. Have fun with it.


----------



## gumbymark (May 25, 2007)

I've gotta say that is the best looking frame in MTB today. I'm just wondering which kidney I will sell to get one.


----------



## Axis II (May 10, 2004)

I like the frame.:thumbsup: It would be even better with a Look Fournales up front.  Not such a good idea on the big wheel up front, IMO. If you know 29ers you know about the issue of toe overlapping your front wheel in tight turns. I can see this will be an issue with this build with the big wheel. I wonder what weight is on on the frame?


----------



## RockStarRacing (Dec 30, 2006)

Axis II said:


> I like the frame.:thumbsup: It would be even better with a Look Fournales up front.  Not such a good idea on the big wheel up front, IMO. If you know 29ers you know about the issue of toe overlapping your front wheel in tight turns. I can see this will be an issue with this build with the big wheel. I wonder what weight is on on the frame?


ive had 2 29ers and 3 96ers and NEVER had toe overlap issues. your talking rubbish, id even suspect you have never even ridden a bike with a 29er wheel........


----------



## chequamagon (Oct 4, 2006)

RockStarRacing said:


> ive had 2 29ers and 3 96ers and NEVER had toe overlap issues. your talking rubbish, id even suspect you have never even ridden a bike with a 29er wheel........


oh jeez, here comes the forum expert again..... yes, he has ridden a 29er....

and toe overlap is an issue for some. I too, have not experienced it. However, I am not narcissistic enough to believe that I have the same experiences as the rest of the world.

In some small sizes and 69er conversions, toe overlap is a serious issue that can cause crashes.


----------



## RockStarRacing (Dec 30, 2006)

chequamagon said:


> oh jeez, here comes the forum expert again..... yes, he has ridden a 29er....
> 
> and toe overlap is an issue for some. I too, have not experienced it. However, I am not narcissistic enough to believe that I have the same experiences as the rest of the world.
> 
> In some small sizes and 69er conversions, toe overlap is a serious issue that can cause crashes.


it was meant to be tongue in cheek, FFS lighten up!

forum expert...... i dont think so.


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

RockStarRacing said:


> it was meant to be tongue in cheek, FFS lighten up!
> 
> forum expert...... i dont think so.


he's being more polite than calling you the forum hack like I would.


----------



## RockStarRacing (Dec 30, 2006)

DeeEight said:


> he's being more polite than calling you the forum hack like I would.


you just did........


----------



## Axis II (May 10, 2004)

RockStarRacing said:


> ive had 2 29ers and 3 96ers and NEVER had toe overlap issues. your talking rubbish, id even suspect you have never even ridden a bike with a 29er wheel........


Yes, this will not be an issue with a 96er designed for the big wheel up front BUT this frame is not, no? My bud's custom Ti Seven 29er frame has toe overlap issues. Not an issue with my WaltWorks 29er.


----------



## sonyisdope (Jul 24, 2004)

Back to the Look . . .

That is an amazing bike! I had the pleasure of riding one for a week last month. It handles awesome, and is very stiff laterally. The bike also has the biggest bling factor of any bike I've ridden. When I was done with a race, I laid the bike down and walked away for a few minutes. When I looked back, there were people around it taking pictures of the bike. 

The one I had was the same exact build as your original post. I believe it weighed 21 pounds with eggbeater C's on it. A little on the heavy side, but what do you expect on a bike with a Reba? You didn't happen to strip it down to the frame and get just a frame weight did you?


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

mpap89 said:


> there's a lot more weight to be saved. crankset, front derailleur, seat, wheelset to name a few. please give us a review of the pedals when you get them.


Give me some brands and models man. I want specifics and estimated weight savings. I'm not up to speed at the best mods these days.

The crankset, I might not touch. this crankset is the k-force light works flawlessly and it's got a ceramic bb.

Wheelset... any production wheelsets out there that are awesome? I just saw the DT Carbon wheelset. 1250 grams I think.

fc


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

J.Mc. said:


> :eekster: Thats gotta be one of the sweetest looking bikes i've ever seen. Friggin awesome! Sure there is plenty of weight that u could drop but for me personally 18lbs is light enough. Damn it man! Now i want a look frame. My hats off to ya even though i am a little jealous


Wait til you hear my review of this bike! It is ground breaking. Speed and acceleration is ridiculous (at 21 lbs). Lateral stability is flawless and vertical compliance is plush. And it's 2.6 lbs. It's the hardtail trifecta.

Full review coming soon.

fc


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

RockStarRacing said:


> i have a friend who is (thinking of) doing the same to a scott scale LTD, pace 440mm rc31ti forks to keep the front end the same with a 29er front wheel, he is aiming at around 14-15lbs!


I am going to try and get that fork today. The current fork is 465 mm. Save some grams too... he, he, he.

Is he looking at singlespeed?

fc


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

sonyisdope said:


> Back to the Look . . .
> 
> That is an amazing bike! I had the pleasure of riding one for a week last month. It handles awesome, and is very stiff laterally. The bike also has the biggest bling factor of any bike I've ridden. When I was done with a race, I laid the bike down and walked away for a few minutes. When I looked back, there were people around it taking pictures of the bike.
> 
> The one I had was the same exact build as your original post. I believe it weighed 21 pounds with eggbeater C's on it. A little on the heavy side, but what do you expect on a bike with a Reba? You didn't happen to strip it down to the frame and get just a frame weight did you?


The bike weighed 20.94 lbs, bone stock with Candy SL pedals. It is a very smart build with all functional parts. Price is $5600 with that build sans pedals.

The frame weight is 2.6 lbs, uncut seat tube for a small. I did not weigh it myself but I think that weight is accurate. I cut the seat tube myself and got a 30 mm section. It is incredibly hard! Also, it weighs nothing. the E-post suspension post weighs 200 grams so there's no savings there really for that system.

As far as toe overlap is concerned, I'll take some photos today with my size 9 shoe.

fc


----------



## DIRT BOY (Aug 22, 2002)

francois said:


> Give me some brands and models man. I want specifics and estimated weight savings. I'm not up to speed at the best mods these days.
> 
> The crankset, I might not touch. this crankset is the k-force light works flawlessly and it's got a ceramic bb.
> 
> ...


That is sooo sweet looking Francois! I am not into IP or even CF MTB bikes but I have too say a bike like this is chaiging my mind. I even tested a Look 595 Ultra and I am very impressed. Enough to re-think my next road frame away from Pina or Nago.

Now On that bike a few things.

The cranks are fine and you really can't get much lighter. Just change the rimgs to a lighter set like Extralite or Stronglight CT2 or TA. Maybe save 50g?
Unless you go for those new DT wheels or a Custom ZTR Wheelset, stay with those. Those mavic wheels are light enough and they are UST so no silly taping or rubber rimstrips.
XTR FD will save 25-30 and perform better than the SRAM one. IMO, SRAM FR suck. Even a Dura-Ace FD will work.
Saddle. Stick with fits your butt. Now a full cabon saddle like a Becker would save 100g+ Also Tune/Carbon Ti saddle. 07 Selle Italia Flite Carbonio
Stem and bar change will save even more.
Tune everybolt on that bike with Ti or Aluminum where you can. Even the rotor bolts and caliper mounting bolts.


----------



## smithy (Jun 28, 2006)

Very nice frame. I liked the original setup better though, despite the extra weight!!


----------



## jtc1 (Apr 13, 2004)

*nice!*

I ended up with the C'Dale Taurine - as it was going to be a while before the Look was avail. in the USA - and the cutting of the seatpost concerned me when it comes time to resell the Look. Also, the Lefty is incredibly stiff - but you were going with rigid anyhow. 
The Look is handsdown the bling winner of the year. It is pure eye candy. Not sure I would make it rigid though - on most courses your lap times may be faster with a sus. fork.

Edge composites and Zipp will be coming out with carbon MTB wheels soon


----------



## DIRT BOY (Aug 22, 2002)

jtc1 said:


> Edge composites and Zipp will be coming out with carbon MTB wheels soon


Reynolds has them alreay. DT Swiss coming next month.

I am getting soem edge rims for the road bike in a few months. Laced to DT 190s hubs.

Man, carbon MTB rims...I don't know about that....


----------



## mpap89 (Mar 10, 2005)

DIRT BOY said:


> Reynolds has them alreay. DT Swiss coming next month.
> 
> I am getting soem edge rims for the road bike in a few months. Laced to DT 190s hubs.
> 
> Man, carbon MTB rims...I don't know about that....


i dont' really see a point in carbon mtb rims. do the dt and reynolds one have aluminum bonded to the carbon for the clincher? or are they all carbon. it doesn't seem like they will be able to make it much lighter than aluminum rims. but maybe you be able to run more than 33 psi like those stan's race rims. 
MIchael


----------



## Cheers! (Jun 26, 2006)

The new carbon rims from Reynolds and DTswiss are "all carbon" as to how light they are... claimed weights around 330g. I wonder what max pressure you can run with them.


----------



## xc-rider (Jan 16, 2004)

Hey Guys,

@françois,
we met at Sea Otter where I introduced the bike to you... glad you still like it now that you have one to ride (and quite a nice one BTW :thumbsup: ).

Now as far as carbon rims are concerned, Reynolds are probably the best you can find on the market, light, wide, strong and super stiff and the tubulars just make the ride sweet... well just like the 986 does 

Here are some pictures of how my bike was back in April (just after Sea Otter), there has been some changes since then but you can see the kind of look the carbon rims give to the bike :


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

xc-rider said:


> Hey Guys,
> 
> @françois,
> we met at Sea Otter where I introduced the bike to you... glad you still like it now that you have one to ride (and quite a nice one BTW :thumbsup: ).
> ...


Pierre from France, is that you? I remember you man. You're the XC Pro, Look engineer right?

It's really cool to see that the science you explained behind the frame is indeed true. The bike tracks like a laser yet it is vertically compliant. And the bottom bracket stiffness gives the bike excellent acceleration.

How much does your bike weigh??? Is there a UCI minimum weight limit on bikes? So can you beat Miguel Martinez up a hill on this bike?

Are you coming to Sea Otter again?

regards,
fc


----------



## jtc1 (Apr 13, 2004)

FINALLY, someone who has the tubulars. I thought I was going to build a set of these - but the tire selection is ONLY Tufo. Though now we can get A. Dugast - but at $150/ea. I have read posts that tubulars have more rolling resistance than a Stans set-up, but not sure what to believe there. 
Tell me - how much does your wheel set weight without tires and disk rotor? Also, did you have a chance to weigh the rims? 
I hear that the designer of the Reynolds wheels is now at Edge composites and they will be releasing their new rims in Jan. 2008. 
If they dont, I will build a set of wheels EXACTLY as you have with the exception of a lefty front hub. With Tufo tape - changing MTB tubulars is a breeze. Plus I gotta believe they corner like a dream with their round profile (as compared to clincher).


----------



## ginsu2k (Jul 28, 2006)

So you're hiding the pedals from us? They must be pretty trick, are they LOOK pedals in development?


----------



## rkj__ (Feb 29, 2004)

wow, that is one very nice LOOKing bike!


----------



## xc-rider (Jan 16, 2004)

Yeah François, this is me.
My bike as it was for Roc d'Azur three weeks ago was 8.85kg, no problem with UCI limit since it's not that light anyway... and there is no specific weight limitation for MTB (I think the limit is the same as for road bikes, which is just silly... you can put very dangerous components on your bike to race on dirt but not on tarmac :thumbsup:  ).

And to answer your question, of course I'll be back at Sea Otter. This race is what motivates me every winter to be ready early in the racing season. 2007 was a good result in the pro XC for me and I'll be back to try and do better in 2008  

@jtc1

Don't worry about rolling resistance, the combo reynolds rims + tubulars just roll great.
Tufo may not be your only option. As you mentionned Dugast does make a MTB tubular, and there is also another well known brand which might be ready with two or three models of tubulars pretty soon.

Weight for the Reynolds rim is around 350gr (I've had four rims all between 351 and 358gr).

Complete wheelset was 1410gr. Not super light but that is not the goal I was trying to achieve anyway. Same for me complete bike, light : YES ... but it must be 100% RACE-READY and RELIABLE.

@ginsu2K

Check Look new pedals called Quartz, the ones I hide on this quite old pictures were the first rideable prototypes.


----------



## Indiefab (Feb 5, 2005)

Dude, carry a few extra grams and put on a front disc rotor! Heehee.


----------



## jtc1 (Apr 13, 2004)

Thanks!! I have heard Conti is coming out with MTB tubulars - but we will need to see what is presented at Sea Otter. 
Tell me - do the tubulars hold air pressure? Or do they lose air like road tubulars - flat in a few days.... Thanks again for the info


----------



## MessagefromTate (Jul 12, 2007)

Indiefab said:


> Dude, carry a few extra grams and put on a front disc rotor! Heehee.


Am I the only one that thinks this bike is being ruined? LOOKed great in the first pics, but the rigid fork, 29er wheel, red Aliante, all taking it downhill fast.


----------



## eurorider (Feb 15, 2004)

It doesn't look like the seatpost assembly supports much of the saddle's rails.


----------



## nino (Jan 13, 2004)

*your'ne not alone...*



MessagefromTate said:


> Am I the only one that thinks this bike is being ruined? LOOKed great in the first pics, but the rigid fork, 29er wheel, red Aliante, all taking it downhill fast.


what once looked sweet now is completely ruined - what a shame !


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

nino said:


> what once looked sweet now is completely ruined - what a shame !


Chill out ace. I'm just experimenting and learning a few things along the way. It will go back to stock.

fc


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

eurorider said:


> It doesn't look like the seatpost assembly supports much of the saddle's rails.


The clamping mechanism is licensed from USE. It's very good. One of the issues though is it doesn't really accept carbon railed saddles very well (or aluminum wrapped carbon). I never realized this but carbon rails are often thicker than aluminum or ti rails.

fc


----------



## EuroMack (Jan 15, 2007)

Francois,
What did you think of lightweight carbon 69er?


----------



## nino (Jan 13, 2004)

*designers...*



francois said:


> The clamping mechanism is licensed from USE. It's very good. One of the issues though is it doesn't really accept carbon railed saddles very well (or aluminum wrapped carbon). I never realized this but carbon rails are often thicker than aluminum or ti rails.
> 
> fc


this detail alone tells me these designers once again have no idea what the bikers out there actually do to their bikes...such a sweet frameset and it only accepts standard rails/saddles???? c'mon...


----------



## EuroMack (Jan 15, 2007)

nino said:


> this detail alone tells me these designers once again have no idea what the bikers out there actually do to their bikes...such a sweet frameset and it only accepts standard rails/saddles???? c'mon...


The designer optimized the clamp for standard chromoly or ti rails that 95% of Look riders will use. If they optimized it for the 5% who will use Tune/Becker/etc., then 95% of their saddles would be poorly supported.

Almost NO seatposts fit oversized rails without modification. I'm sure you could cut out some aluminum, same as any other lightweight post. Anyone running a fragile, ultralight carbon saddle is probably not afraid to file away a few grams of aluminum.


----------



## xc-rider (Jan 16, 2004)

@Nino,

"Designers..."

Well, I'm one of these so might be a good chance to have an open discussion.
It's true that the R5 Epost for now only accepts 7mm rails.
Why ? Mostly because the frame + seatpost assembly was meant to be sold as a complete bike where we use Fizik Gobi with Kium or Manganese rails which are 7mm.
The USE sumo clamp allowed us to create a nice looking, reliable and most importantly REVERSIBLE (5mm positive or negative setback) seatpost which were very important features. Also the lateral clamping fits perfectly on the aero section of our seatpost.

Now, to make the seatpost compatible with 8mm rails or ovalized rails, we would have had to use a vertical clamping with two bolts (keeping the same 5mm offset). We might have lost the possibility to reverse the seatpost, we might have lost some rails to clamp adjustment possibility as the two top parts of the clamps are very far away from each other (with no other real advantages since bottom support of the rails is what matters most), we might have lost part of the sex appeal and the seatpost might have been heavier. Honnestly all the tests we've made at Interbike, Eurobike and Roc d'Azur were so positive with the Gobi and the actual design that I don't think we chose a too bad option.
Of course you always try to satisfy 100% of people, including WW, but in some case you have to choose between some features and the carbon rails wasn't our first priority for MTB.

But for you Nino, we have another option (which we had in mind when we chose to not make the R5 carbon rails compatible) : the E-post Ti with adjustable setback and carbon rails full compatibility :










Hope this helps you understand our choice.

Pierre


----------



## nino (Jan 13, 2004)

*designers II...*



xc-rider said:


> @Nino,
> 
> "Designers..."
> 
> ...


ok.

i don't like it when other people select my saddle or do hinder me from selecting parts in any way. that's where my main gripe with these integrated seatposts is anyway: this is just an optic gimmick and makes no sense nor is it any lighter:

-it restricts you to use whichever seatpost you might want and in some cases can either fit or even NOT fit at all (what if someone needs more setback than your post offers?...).
-it can't be transportet as easily as bikes with removable seatpost
-once cut to lenght it can be sold to shorter people only
-the seatpost can't be lowered on descents (not that i personally would want that but there's people out there doing this)
-and to me most important it isn't any lighter at all. it adds weight!!

hey -this sounds too harsh as the LOOK really is a super sweet bike. i really like it a lot but it's in such details where i think the marketing guys have too much input over the guys at the front who i'm sure wouldn't put such integrated designs on the wanted list when designing a frame...

i would not want a Scott Scale LTD and i would not want this Look as well JUST BECAUSE of the integrated seatpost design. it doensn't offer a single advantage other than look different. i know that the Look frame at least has this shock dampening thing in it and i admit it seems well thought out but for me it just makes no sense.


----------



## gdunha (Sep 10, 2004)

*help please*



francois said:


> Pierre from France, is that you? I remember you man. You're the XC Pro, Look engineer right?
> 
> It's really cool to see that the science you explained behind the frame is indeed true. The bike tracks like a laser yet it is vertically compliant. And the bottom bracket stiffness gives the bike excellent acceleration.
> 
> ...


What cranks and rings are you running on that bike?

Thanks


----------



## AggieXCRacer (Oct 10, 2005)

gdunha said:


> What cranks and rings are you running on that bike?
> 
> Thanks


Those are the FSA K-Force Light MTB cranks in the above pictures of Francois' bike. I am not sure about Pierre's.


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

AggieXCRacer said:


> Those are the FSA K-Force Light MTB cranks in the above pictures of Francois' bike. I am not sure about Pierre's.


Yup,
Hollow carbon, nothing is stiffer, nothing is smoother, nothing is stronger...

 he, he, he. I got that from the ad banner on top of this page. It's got ceramic bearings too I hear.

fc


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

nino said:


> this detail alone tells me these designers once again have no idea what the bikers out there actually do to their bikes...such a sweet frameset and it only accepts standard rails/saddles???? c'mon...


First you slam me, then you insult the designers. C'mon! Let's have a discussion but don't be rude.

fc


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

EuroMack said:


> Francois,
> What did you think of lightweight carbon 69er?


You know, I haven't actually tried it that way. My fork is tall at 465mm. I need a 440mm one. I've been having fun with the 19 lb. 26er setup. It is soo fast.

I'll ride the 69er tonight for trick or treat!

Did you guys see my new lights? 380 grams, 960 lumens. There are no wires and external batteries.
fc


----------



## AggieXCRacer (Oct 10, 2005)

francois said:


> You know, I haven't actually tried it that way. My fork is tall at 465mm. I need a 440mm one. I've been having fun with the 19 lb. 26er setup. It is soo fast.
> 
> I'll ride the 69er tonight for trick or treat!
> 
> ...












That's a hot setup. I'm thinking about putting a rigid fork on my hardtail for a short track slaying machine


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

AggieXCRacer said:


> That's a hot setup. I'm thinking about putting a rigid fork on my hardtail for a short track slaying machine


Yup. I'm entering a couple of dirt hillclimb events and a cross races with this rig. I would slay if only I was in shape.

fc


----------



## AggieXCRacer (Oct 10, 2005)

francois said:


> Yup. I'm entering a couple of dirt hillclimb events and a cross races with this rig. I would slay if only I was in shape.
> 
> fc


Seriously dude...that bike is hot. I am having severe bike lust and my new Racer-X is not liking it. I swore I'd never go back to a hardtail but frick that thing is nice looking :thumbsup:


----------



## nino (Jan 13, 2004)

francois said:


> First you slam me, then you insult the designers. C'mon! Let's have a discussion but don't be rude.
> 
> fc


there's nothing rude in it and i didn't insult you at all. i'm just telling how i see things. i said i actually like the look of the bike eetc....but FOR ME it makes no sense. maybe you can explain what the story behind those integrated seatposts really is? are they cheaper to manufacture ? lighter ? stiffer (who might want that anyway in a seatpost) ? more versatile (ahem, heck no!) ? ....i think this is pure cosmetics. that's something some people might like. there's people out there riding Cannondales just because they like the different look of the Lefty...others running spinergy carbon wheels just because they like the distintive look...that's ok. but technically it has no advantage and that's what counts for me in 1st place. aesthetics is also very important and that's where this beauty shines indeed. very sweet. at least in the configuration pictured with regular 26" wheels.


----------



## ctracer01 (Oct 17, 2004)

*you are officially banned*



AggieXCRacer said:


> Seriously dude...that bike is hot.


hot??

c'mon. paris hilton says hot...:nono: :nono: :nono: :nono: :nono: :nono: :nono:

heh heh. just kidding

@francois

beautiful! i wish i had that kind of cash to just kind of play around with thousands of dollars of bike parts.


----------



## dirtdrop (Dec 29, 2003)

francois said:


> Did you guys see my new lights? 380 grams, 960 lumens. There are no wires and external batteries.
> fc


M-u-s-t b-u-y e-x-p-o-s-u-r-e l-i-g-h-t :rockon:

Whats the burn and recharge time like?


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

uno-speedo said:


> M-u-s-t b-u-y e-x-p-o-s-u-r-e l-i-g-h-t :rockon:
> 
> Whats the burn and recharge time like?


burn time is 3-10-24 hours for hi-med-low settings

Charge time is 4 hours for the small light and 12 hours for the big light.










fc


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

ctracer01 said:


> @francois
> 
> beautiful! i wish i had that kind of cash to just kind of play around with thousands of dollars of bike parts.


No cash involved man. I'm just doing my job running mtbr.com A long time ago, I quit my day job to do mtbr so I can play with unobtanium parts.

I did get a night riding ticket last night though and that is a bummer :madman:. Yes, night riding is illegal in most of the San Jose, Bay Area. Hmm, maybe mtbr will pay for my ticket. I was testing product... that's it.

fc


----------



## snowdrifter (Aug 2, 2006)

This bike is starting to rival Axis's FrankenBike... Let's see some twisted Nokons on it for good measure..


----------



## AggieXCRacer (Oct 10, 2005)

ctracer01 said:


> hot??
> 
> c'mon. paris hilton says hot...:nono: :nono: :nono: :nono: :nono: :nono: :nono:
> 
> heh heh. just kidding


i'll cut you.


----------



## perryr (Jul 26, 2004)

I am very close to buying a Look 986. Can someone please explain how the seatpost works. I know you cut to fit, but once cut, how much adjustment is available? How do you adjust seat height? How is the post secured in the seat mast? 

Thank you for any info!


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

perryr said:


> I am very close to buying a Look 986. Can someone please explain how the seatpost works. I know you cut to fit, but once cut, how much adjustment is available? How do you adjust seat height? How is the post secured in the seat mast?
> 
> Thank you for any info!


Here you go. I actually cut the post on this test bike and learned a bit about the process.

The post stays on by compressing a bunch of elastomers with an allen bolt. The elastomers expand and they hold on to the walls of the seat tube. Since the compresion elastomers are just preventing the seatpost from pulling out, not a lot of pressure is needed. (5nm)

There is about 30 mm of adjustability once the post is cut. This is done with spacers.

There are three 10mm suspension elastomers supplied with the post. The softest one gives about 1mm of travel and gives a softer feel to the rear of the bike. The hardest one is meant to give the most firm and direct connection to the bike.

I cut the seat tube myself and it is scary but it is a simple task, specially if you've cut a lot of steer tubes. I think this step is meant only for dealers to do. It's all about measuring and knowing your saddle height. The crank delivered with the small frame is a 170mm so that affects measurements too.

One thing interesting is that the seat tube material is pretty darn hard. It took a bit of effort to cut through. I have photos of my 150lbs of weight standing on its side. It does not flex at all and that's good.

fc

photos:
first photo is the post all the way down and next is up with the spacers


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

more photos.


----------



## perryr (Jul 26, 2004)

francois said:


> more photos.


Hey, Thanx A lot! That explains it perfectly. I want to buy a 986!


----------



## Batas (Jan 16, 2004)

EXCELLENT explanation! Thanks!

Do you know how much does that piece that connects the seat to the frame weights?


----------



## nino (Jan 13, 2004)

*good question!*



Batas said:


> EXCELLENT explanation! Thanks!
> 
> Do you know how much does that piece that connects the seat to the frame weights?


that's what i wonder as well.

i would like to see detailed weights of
-frame without seatpost
-frame including all the seatpost parts

seeing the Scott Limited saddle clamp alone weighs 130g i would not expect the look solution to be any lighter....which makes it heavier than a lightweight seatpost.

as mentioned already - there is no advantage other than a distictive look (and it's good at it, i have to admit that)


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

nino said:


> that's what i wonder as well.
> 
> i would like to see detailed weights of
> -frame without seatpost
> ...


The seatpost is about 200 grams. I will get an actual weight later. Although, I think I need the Nino industrial scale since mine is getting tired.

I think the big selling point of the e-post seatpost is their suspension dampening system. I'm still trying to get a feel for that.

I don't think I have it in me to strip down this frame, weigh it and rebuild it. It is perfectly assembled right
now.

Okay actual weight: *220 grams*

fc


----------



## Axis II (May 10, 2004)

snowdrifter said:


> This bike is starting to rival Axis's FrankenBike... Let's see some twisted Nokons on it for good measure..


Nope....it's got to lose about 2.5lbs before it's worthy.


----------



## perryr (Jul 26, 2004)

Hi Francois,

So have you had a chance to spend time on the bike? Curious as to how it handles, and the ride quality.

I ride a 71.5 HT Titanium framed bike. Its quick, and a decent ride quality, maybe a touch harsh. But the bike is stiff and really shines when the speeds are high and aggresive. I would like to find a bike that is quick, does well at high speed, but maybe is a bit more forgiving on the back (ride quality). The 986 geometry is nearly exactly what i am riding, so I suspect it has a familiar handling response, but not sure of the ride quality or stiffness. any input appreciated!


----------



## Batas (Jan 16, 2004)

wow. Heavy... And at a place where you want it light...


----------



## punk0 (Dec 12, 2006)

XC-rider, about the quartz pedals. Any info on them?
How durable are they?


----------



## gdunha (Sep 10, 2004)

*Quartz pedals and cranks*

Pierre,

Yes when will the look pedals be available in US and what cranks and rings are you using on your bike?


----------



## mtberfrombothell (Apr 29, 2006)

*derailleur cage size*

Francois,

Is that XO derailleur you're using a short cage? How's that work for you in your 3x9 setup? Thanks


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

mtberfrombothell said:


> Francois,
> 
> Is that XO derailleur you're using a short cage? How's that work for you in your 3x9 setup? Thanks


I do not know if they are short or long. I'll post detailed pics and you might be able to tell. It works perfect on this bike.

The bike weighs 18.56 lbs right now. I'm using KEO pedals right now since the Quartz haven't arrived yet. It is an uphill ITT machine!!!

fc


----------



## grawbass (Aug 23, 2004)

francois said:


> You know, I haven't actually tried it that way. My fork is tall at 465mm. I need a 440mm one. I've been having fun with the 19 lb. 26er setup. It is soo fast.
> 
> I'll ride the 69er tonight for trick or treat!
> 
> ...


Francois, could you give me some more info on that triple bulb light? Are those Cree LEDs?


----------



## xc-rider (Jan 16, 2004)

gdunha said:


> Pierre,
> 
> Yes when will the look pedals be available in US and what cranks and rings are you using on your bike?


Sorry guys, it's not really my job to talk about when this of this is going to be available. I can only answer about technical questions and the tuning I do on my bike  ... I'm here more as a WW than as a Look guy who spies forums 

The good news is that I can answer about my crankset.
I used an FRM 2x9 for the first part of the season and now use a PMP 2x9 which has an even greater Qfactor (155mm), good chainline, and superb fabrication precision which translates in super fast rolling.

Here is an article in the last edition of VTT magazine where you can see the configuration of my bike for Roc d'Azur ... hope you like it :


----------



## BikeNerd2453 (Jan 28, 2004)

mpap89 said:


> i dont' really see a point in carbon mtb rims. do the dt and reynolds one have aluminum bonded to the carbon for the clincher? or are they all carbon. it doesn't seem like they will be able to make it much lighter than aluminum rims. but maybe you be able to run more than 33 psi like those stan's race rims.
> MIchael


I've been running carbon clincher MTB rims for about 18 months now, the Cole Aries Lite. Not the lightest wheels, but they're more the "trail" wheelset/rim than the XC Race style. A bit wider rim, like 26mm.
Super, super, crazy stiff, they're pretty rad wheels. I have a set of the rims only that I think I'm going to build up with some DT 240 hubs this winter too, for a project. Wish they were 32 hole, then I'd have I9 lace 'em up.

I'm not a little guy either, and I've banged this bad boys up quite a bit, no problems at all.

The new DT carbon wheels are HOT! I haven't seen what Edge has on deck, are they clinchers?


----------



## Dan Gerous (Feb 18, 2004)

BikeNerd2453 said:


> I've been running carbon clincher MTB rims for about 18 months now, the Cole Aries Lite. Not the lightest wheels, but they're more the "trail" wheelset/rim than the XC Race style. A bit wider rim, like 26mm.
> Super, super, crazy stiff, they're pretty rad wheels. I have a set of the rims only that I think I'm going to build up with some DT 240 hubs this winter too, for a project. Wish they were 32 hole, then I'd have I9 lace 'em up.
> 
> I'm not a little guy either, and I've banged this bad boys up quite a bit, no problems at all.
> ...


I9 will have carbon rim wheels next year using Edge rims I think...


----------



## SuspectDevice (Apr 12, 2004)

Edge... Oh man do they have some cool rims in the works...


----------



## nino (Jan 13, 2004)

nino said:


> that's what i wonder as well.
> 
> i would like to see detailed weights of
> -frame without seatpost
> ...


hey guys - i just found these interesting pics in the german WW forum:

Look 986 frame in size M with uncut seatmast: 1338g

well - as i mentioned all the time these solutions are far from beeing light:nono:


----------



## Tiffster (Jan 30, 2008)

Francios

Any news on the Quartz pedals??? Getting a bit impatient waiting for them


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

Tiffster said:


> Francios
> 
> Any news on the Quartz pedals??? Getting a bit impatient waiting for them


My look contact said another few weeks til I get a set.

Does anybody have them??

fc


----------



## Tiffster (Jan 30, 2008)

Jezzo - what's taking so long! - still i dont mind if they make them really good - 99grams per pedal and they have a platform and dont use crap bushings A'la Crankbrothers, Xpedo and Exustar.

I know a few people who have them but i think they must be prototypes or something.


----------



## xc-rider (Jan 16, 2004)

Hey guys,

Here is a gallery of my new 986 for 2008 season.
I'll still have to upload more pictures (of the parts) but the complete bike is here... hope you'll like it 

http://pyfisracing.spaces.live.com/photos/cns!609B53593A5880D0!379/


----------



## Tiffster (Jan 30, 2008)

Where/how did you get a set of Quartz pedals?!?!?

Any chance of some close up pics of them??


----------



## Indiefab (Feb 5, 2005)

xc-rider said:


> Hey guys,
> 
> Here is a gallery of my new 986 for 2008 season.
> I'll still have to upload more pictures (of the parts) but the complete bike is here... hope you'll like it
> ...


There is nothing about that bike that I don't love. Are those Middleburn cranks? I had trouble seeing them in detail.

Nice website, too. Planning on more pro races this season?


----------



## xc-rider (Jan 16, 2004)

@ Tiffster,

In case you've missed the information before, I'm Look MTB Product manager, Pro XC racer and a true weight weenie on my own time (that's why I'm here  ). That's why I have the Look Quartz Pedal, mine are still prototypes, no logo, etc.

@Indiefab,

Glad you like the bike.
The crankset is a PMP with Ceramic Speed bearings and Carbon-Ti chainrings. This PMP crankset isn't the lightest but it has an awsome Q-Factor at 155mm and a good chainline. More details here :
http://pmpbike.net/bike.php/p-6x41x189/codsart-132/page-1/MTB-CrankSet-Double-Chainrings.htm

More Pro races, I hope so :thumbsup: 
Yesterday was my first preparation race, won it. Now I'll be training some more until the start of the "real" season in March. I should be at Sea Otter again this year. 26th last year in the Pro XC... I'll just try and do better  
Thanks for your interest.


----------



## Tiffster (Jan 30, 2008)

Ah, i did miss that bit of info lol :thumbsup: 

Still - any chance of some close up's?


----------



## xc-rider (Jan 16, 2004)

I guess you can see more here :
http://www.youtube.com/user/lookcycletv

You can also try and Google "look quartz", you should find many more pictures.


----------



## Slobberdoggy (Sep 26, 2005)

@ xc-rider,

How would you describe the overall experience of using a Tubular tire vs. tubeless? 

How heavy are you? (Seeing that you are using 28 spokes)

Very nice bike. I like how Look seems to use a bottom pull front der.


----------



## Tiffster (Jan 30, 2008)

I watched the vid on youtube - very nice but it would still be nice to get some close up shots.

The pedals look rather big though - not that im complaining @99grams each :thumbsup:


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

xc-rider said:


> @ Tiffster,
> 
> In case you've missed the information before, I'm Look MTB Product manager, Pro XC racer and a true weight weenie on my own time (that's why I'm here  ). That's why I have the Look Quartz Pedal, mine are still prototypes, no logo, etc.
> 
> ...


That is amazing Pierre. Niice build. Truly leading edge. I hope to see you at Sea Otter. How long are you going to be in town?

regards,
fc


----------



## Indiefab (Feb 5, 2005)

PYF-
Just let us know if there is an opening on the Look team. I'm sure a few of us would be willing to relocate to the French Alps to ride some sweet gear


----------



## xc-rider (Jan 16, 2004)

Oops, sorry for not coming and answer your questions faster  

@ Slobberdoggy,

Being a double cranks fan, I couldn't pass the opportunity of using the down pull front derailleur on this bike as well as a down swing (high clamp) mechanism.
Same for the BB width, 68mm makes things much easier and offer much more choices when it comes to cranksets / BBs.

Now for the wheel.
I ride Notubes ZTR355 rims most of the times, generally with tubeless ready tires on (Geax TNT). What I can say is that the tubular makes the same thread pattern much more versatile compare to the "clincher" version.
A great example of this is the Mezcal that I used in TNT version 95% of the season in 2007, even in mud... well, using it everywhere is "do-able" but it definitely makes some tracks much more technical than they would be with better suited tires for the kind of terrain you are on.
Now the same Mezcal in tubular has so much more grip (I repeat, exact same thread and compound) that I don't feel I need another tire even in deep mud like my first race was a couple of weeks ago.

Now to be honnest there are two drawbacks to tubulars :
- installation of course
- and for now there is weight, tubulars for now comes at no weight advantage --> I add about 100gr to my bike when using the tubulars... but for me they are worth adding !!!

Finally, 28 spokes with a Reynolds rim is not a problem at all since the tensions that can be used are much higher that with a light alloy rim and since the rim is so stiff ! I'm only 131lbs and would go with 24 spokes without any doubt if I could do it all over again !

@francois,

Not sure yet when and for how long I'll be at Sea Otter... but I'll definitely be there (Miguel Martinez will be there too) and who knows, maybe we'll have some new products to introduce to you for a great article on MTBR  :thumbsup: 
Still need to decide which wheelset to travel with... tubeless or tubulars ? :idea:


----------



## Slobberdoggy (Sep 26, 2005)

xc-rider,

when you race or even if you don't - what is your procedure for repairing a flat with the tubulars? I can only presume you've gotten a flat with the tubulars perhaps once. Roadies sometimes just rip off the flat tire and put on a new one without fresh glue.

It sounds really impressive. I'd like to try tubulars with a xc bike or maybe a downhill bike.


----------



## Hand/of/Midas (Sep 19, 2007)

Slobberdoggy said:


> xc-rider,
> 
> when you race or even if you don't - what is your procedure for repairing a flat with the tubulars? I can only presume you've gotten a flat with the tubulars perhaps once. Roadies sometimes just rip off the flat tire and put on a new one without fresh glue.
> 
> It sounds really impressive. I'd like to try tubulars with a xc bike or maybe a downhill bike.


and do you use glue or tufo tape?


----------



## xc-rider (Jan 16, 2004)

I had a problem once with Tufo Tape so for now I use Vittoria Mastik one glue. I think there is one problem in MTB with the tape that is a non concern on a Road bike : low pressure ! On the Road bike the tubular is well maintained by the pressure, not so true on MTB.
So even if there is more bonding area between rim and tubular in MTB I'm a little more concerned by the quality of the bonding between the two.

Flat during races, never happened to me... but definitely I don't have the spare tubular with me (that's why I use TNT for marathons) so I'd try a couple of Pitstop cartridge (with latex inside) and then walk to my car if it doesn't work ;-)))


----------



## Ssushi (Jan 3, 2007)

Nice bike. You could save about 200g by changing the fork to a Manitou Absolute.


----------



## xc-rider (Jan 16, 2004)

Not sure I understand your comment... the fork already is a MRD Absolute 80mm disc only... so I don't know of any lighter Manitou fork at the moment (except for Gunn Rita Dahle's fork maybe which is a superlight team version !)...


----------



## Ssushi (Jan 3, 2007)

xc-rider said:


> Not sure I understand your comment... the fork already is a MRD Absolute 80mm disc only... so I don't know of any lighter Manitou fork at the moment (except for Gunn Rita Dahle's fork maybe which is a superlight team version !)...


Ahhhh, sorry. I thought it was a Reba from the pics.

BTW - how do you rate the fork? I find it quite flexible, making it not that accurate but I love the lightness!


----------



## limba (Jan 9, 2004)

You could try a rigid Ritchey carbon fork too.


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

Mods, I have new wheels - 1200 grams

Also, I'm using a Dura Ace 9-speed cog and DT Skewers

Saddle is a bit lighter.

Pending:
- Look Ti Quartz - save 100 grams
- ESI grips - save 200 grams

Maybe:
- Stans rotor
- Lighter Selle saddle?
- Shimano road derailleur
- lighter skewers

- I probably need a fatter tire up front.

fc


----------



## Cheers! (Jun 26, 2006)

francois, how do you like those conti speedking supersonics?


----------



## Hippienflipflops (Oct 18, 2006)

id probably go ahead and drill a few holes in the frame to lose even more weight


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

Cheers! said:


> francois, how do you like those conti speedking supersonics?


The Conti Speed Kings are marvelous lightweight tires. First off, my set weighs in at 410 and 420 grams each. I'm using them with Stans sealant and it's working well with that.

They're not really 2.1 tires. They're about 1.9s in the WTB scale. They're very thin and very supple in terms of casing. The knobs are quite meaty for a lightweight tire.

On a trail with sharp rocks, I slashed one tire with a 1 inch gash and all my sealant leaked out. They're not really made for harsh rocky conditions.

Ride quality. They ride very smooth and handle awesome! They climb, brake and corner very well. Their only limition is the small size.

In terms of speed, they seem to roll fast on the trail and loose stuff. On asphalt or hardpack, they make a bit of noise and I think there are faster tires out there.

fc


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

limba said:


> You could try a rigid Ritchey carbon fork too.


Say whut? V-brake fork? Too short and no tire clearance? Or do they have an mtb fork?

fc


----------



## limba (Jan 9, 2004)

francois said:


> Say whut? V-brake fork? Too short and no tire clearance? Or do they have an mtb fork?
> 
> fc


Yeah, there's a carbon mtn.bike fork. It's compatible with V-brakes or disc. Very light and very expensive.


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

limba said:


> Yeah, there's a carbon mtn.bike fork. It's compatible with V-brakes or disc. Very light and very expensive.


I have good friends at Ritchey, thanks for the tip.

But that fork is too short. Also, the v-brake bosses and road fork look is a little off.

fc


----------

