Pinarello Razha K 105 / Veloce

[Matt230]

Hi all

I have recently posted a thread on here about my need for an Endurance framed road bike and have now been offered a 2015 Pinarello Razhr K with either 105 / Veloce, both old unused stock for around £1400.

It seems the geometry isn't too bad (i'm 5 feet 10 inches) so on a 53.5 frame the headtube is 175 high but the top tube is a long 557, in 52 frame the headtube is 160 high and top tube 545.

Any thoughts on the Pinarello? The rear part pf the frame seems very thick compared with the Giant Defy et al

Matt

[scherzkeks]

Matt230 said:

Hi all

I have recently posted a thread on here about my need for an Endurance framed road bike and have now been offered a 2015 Pinarello Razhr K with either 105 / Veloce, both old unused stock for around £1400.

It seems the geometry isn't too bad (i'm 5 feet 10 inches) so on a 53.5 frame the headtube is 175 high but the top tube is a long 557, in 52 frame the headtube is 160 high and top tube 545.

Any thoughts on the Pinarello? The rear part pf the frame seems very thick compared with the Giant Defy et al

Matt

It depends on your leg length in proportion to your upper body. If you are perfectly avg. (forgot what the ratio is), then the bike should be very close. If you are long-legged, I'd drop down a size for TT length. Your saddle height is also a factor. If you sit silly high like many rec. cyclists, it throws the whole thing off.

[Jimbo.]

Matt230 said:

Hi all

I have recently posted a thread on here about my need for an Endurance framed road bike and have now been offered a 2015 Pinarello Razhr K with either 105 / Veloce, both old unused stock for around £1400.

It seems the geometry isn't too bad (i'm 5 feet 10 inches) so on a 53.5 frame the headtube is 175 high but the top tube is a long 557, in 52 frame the headtube is 160 high and top tube 545.

Any thoughts on the Pinarello? The rear part pf the frame seems very thick compared with the Giant Defy et al

Matt

Ignore the stated tube lengths: they're largely meaningless once everything is factored in. Look at the stack and reach figures instead, with stack being the height of the (top of the) head tube measured from the BB, and reach being the horizontal distance measured from the BB to the top of the head tube. For said Pinarello, a 535.5 frame comes in at:

Stack: 379
Reach: 582

Whereas the 520 comes in at:

Stack: 371
Reach: 568

...as stated here: http://www.pinarello.com/en/bike-2015/road/razha-k (although I assume these exclude any headset hardware or spacers)

Seems there's very little in it: 8mm in stack height, 14mm in reach. What you go for depends upon your leg length vs. torso length, arm length, flexibility etc, etc, and to do that you've best of trying them for size. Granted the small differences in stand/reach can be dialled out with spacers and longer/shorter stems, but it'd pay to get things as "right" as possible. That said, assuming normal proportions, at 5'10, I'd imagine the 568mm reach of the 520mm would seem a bit small and feel cramped. You'd _probably_ have to run a silly long stem, which'd give oil-tanker like turn-in and a lot of weight over the front. The 582mm reach of the would allow a bit more room without resorting to daft stems. But your call, of course!

[Matt230]

That's great, thank you

How about the Pinarello as an endurance bike?

Matt

[Jimbo.]

Matt230 said:

That's great, thank you

How about the Pinarello as an endurance bike?

Matt

No idea! TBH I don't care much for Pinarellos: too much BS surrounding them ("This frame weights 850 grams...if you weigh just the carbon bikes, and don't count the paint or the glue...").

The geo looks fairly standard "for an Endurance" bike (to use marketing speak) i.e. shorter and taller than others. How the frame "works" or feels is impossible to say, but suffice to say it won't be hugely different from any other bike of the same ilk.

[scherzkeks]

Stem lenght diff. should be no greater than 1 cm to 2 cm max between sizes, assuming the seat angles are the same. And a slightly longer stem is a good thing for stability on long descents.

If long-legged always take the smaller frame. Seat height has a broad range compared to reach. You can't shorten a frame that is too long, and you do not want to be on the limit.

Nice choice on the Pinarello!

[Matt230]

I am 5 feet 10 with short legs / long torso but poor flexibility due to my back injury and tight hamstrings

Matt

[scherzkeks]

Matt230 said:

I am 5 feet 10 with short legs / long torso but poor flexibility due to my back injury and tight hamstrings

Matt

The 55.7 top tube should be really close then, assuming your reach isn't too limited by your injury. Flexibility is one of the most misunderstood things in cycling -- as long as you are reasonably flexible, it does not change your basic fit considerably. Your segment legnths and proportions are more important.

[Jimbo.]

scherzkeks said:

Stem lenght diff. should be no greater than 1 cm to 2 cm max between sizes, assuming the seat angles are the same. And a slightly longer stem is a good thing for stability on long descents.

If long-legged always take the smaller frame. Seat height has a broad range compared to reach. You can't shorten a frame that is too long, and you do not want to be on the limit.

Nice choice on the Pinarello!

Not necessarily: sometimes the "bigger" frame will have the same/very similar reach, but a greater stack height, which brings the bars up to meet the longer-legged (and thus higher-saddled) rider.

I fell between states sizes (52 and 54) for the Specialized Tarmac I've just ordered (well, WON!), and I'm longer in the leg/shorter in the torso. However, the 54 was a whole 1mm longer in reach but something like 20mm higher in stack...

[scherzkeks]

Jimbo. said:

Not necessarily: sometimes the "bigger" frame will have the same/very similar reach, but a greater stack height, which brings the bars up to meet the longer-legged (and thus higher-saddled) rider.

I fell between states sizes (52 and 54) for the Specialized Tarmac I've just ordered (well, WON!), and I'm longer in the leg/shorter in the torso. However, the 54 was a whole 1mm longer in reach but something like 20mm higher in stack...

It is possible. Most can ride 2-3 sizes, but only one will really be optimal (or as close as possible).

I tend to favor Italian bikes (and have a short torso), and on most of the brands I have owned or own, the difference between a 54 c-c and a 56 is significant enough to matter. One offers me a proper road position with a stem length in harmony with the frame and good setback, and the other doesn't.