Just saying a stock bike can be great. If you buy a stock size that isn’t right for you that’s different, and you’re that right 5 sizes isn’t Colnago’s usual style.

Yep, that is correct benito. As we all remember from, ahem, physics law of the lever, when the seatstays are dropped this creates a lower fulcrum point which increases leverage thus more compliance in the fore aft plane when the mass is seated. Combine this with a D-shaped seatpost (which this C68 also has) like the Giant Revolt, and you have one very comfortable riding bike. Hey, Ben Delaney just dropped this excellent review of this bike that BR readers may like: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=flwFIiGmDhI Cheers.

You barely ride bro, get real. This thing is sick.

I am fully aware of the advances over the last 30+ years in glues (includes resins) used in bonded lug construction of CF materials, whether they be for bicycle frames or the myriad of other uses to which they are put, and whether the materials used in the lugs are carbon fibre or any other material, Al alloys included for that matter.

The fact still remains that a bonded-lugged construction method creates in an inherent weakness which is due the nature of bonded joints, and which is a well understood and documented engineering phenomenon. A properly designed and fabricated monocoque construction is superior, and the reason almost every other manufacturer doesn’t use lugged joints (regardless of the lug material) for carbon fibre frames, or in high-stress component applications bicycle related or otherwise.

You didn’t read carefully. There’s no real difference between what’s done now with epoxy cementing frame parts together. What is different is the epoxies. Seriously, do you actually think this process is exactly the same as it was 30 years ago? Do you actually think there have been zero advances in epoxies? That you’re stuck on the lug thing means you’ve completely lost the plot: in both cases, there is a tube being cemented in a hole with epoxy.

Such a poor attempt at a riposte only exposes a profound ignorance of the differences between the CF monocoque method which is the current largely accepted construction standard (except in the case of Colnago’s C68) for safety and durability reasons, and the glued lug method of construction which was very quickly dumped by the industry once the inherent flaws and failings of the method became obvious over 30 years ago, and the safety risks to riders experiencing failures raised the spectre of legal action from affected frame owners.

The only reason Colnago are now using carbon lugged sections and gluing the sections together is because they are a lazy and cheap manufacturer, and they are aware that there is an endless supply of ignorant customers who have no clue as to the well documented flaws of the glued-lug construction method. The mere mention of the name ‘Colnago’ seems to trigger a hypnotic adorative trance in some people, so much so that they are willing to part with huge sums of money for cheaply made, overpriced, and poorly designed product, just so long as it bears the name ‘Colnago’,… it is customers who are obsessed with a romantic notion of storied cycling brands that is nowadays taken advantage of by some manufacturers, who cleverly utilise the buyers with a fever dream for a Colnago to the company’s advantage to fatten the corporate bank balance, in this case it’s Ernesto and his newly enjoined (in May of 2023) venture capitalist buddies based in Abu Dhabi (Chimera Investments LLC).

dropping the stays allows for some seat tube compliance

Yeah, but normally a frame at this price level comes in like a dozen sizes and three of them might fit you. This thing comes in 5 sizes. Five. The word painted on the side won’t make up for that.

Weight is around 1150g, depending on the sizing – which is a bit odd to begin with. If you normally ride a 56cm from most brands, you’d ride the 510 for a similar stack and reach.