Noticed something interesting about Cannondale Road/race frames over the last 20+ years

[JohnnyD]

While having a discussion about road/race bikes on another forum. I decided to do a little bit of "for fun" research. I wasn't too shocked, but others who "SWEAR" that the latest and greatest bikes are so radically different and therefore "BETTER" (BIKE SNOBS) were.
So here's is the geometry specs for a 2000 R2000, CAAD 10, 12, 13 and even the new(ish) superbike the SuperSix Evo Lab71


Or you can see the webpage for yourself here

Interesting to see how little has changed significantly on road/race frames. Materials and aero have really improved(subjectively IMHO) been the biggest game changers.

 

[black lightning 1987]

My feeling with no data to support it is that there is very little performance advantage from a current road frame compared to one from 15-20 years ago. The weight of the frames may be a bit lower now but the difference wouldn't affect the average rider to any degree. Back when I was racing occasionally I did several test rides to compare my 1987 Cannondale to my 1970s Reynolds 531 Bob Jackson. I never once attained the same average speed on the Jackson over the same route as I did on the Cannondale. Whether that was due to my ability/effort on any given day is a possible factor but I came to the conclusion that the stiffness of the Cannondale was the difference. As time passed I think builders who worked with all the various frame materials were able to get pretty much equal performance by manipulating tube diameters and shapes.

 

[JohnnyD]

I agree with you 100% on there is no noticeable advantages of modern vs. older frames, other than minor weight and aero. I believe it is due to the fact that the basic "template" of an efficient road has been achieved. Unlike MTB's, which have changed dramatically due to the ever increasing technology/designs that are allowing riders to tackle bigger and more difficult terrain and obstacles.
I think the only way to really increase performance on both styles of riding though is with electric assistance. Which to me kind of defeats the idea of riding a bike, except for those who have medical needs that an e-bike could help get out and ride.

 

[Nico]

It is because they never made big changes to the geometry that I stayed with the brand.
This geometry, stack and reach, fits me.

I feel a huge change when it comes to frame material and geometry.
In the past I had a Reynolgs 501 which felt really elastic, when I put power on de the pedals you could see how the bottom bracket flexes. Same with the CAAD 7 racer I had, also very flexible BB and also quite hard ride, some paths my handlebar could be knocked out of my hands.

This improved radically when I bought a used Synapse carbon 2011, what a difference. Finally a stiff bb and a nicer and smoother ride. Couple of years later I bought a new Synapse carbon 2014 (2014-2018 model).
That made the 2011 feel too flexible and I did not ride it any more decided to sell it.

My 2012 Super X has almost the same geometry except for the longer wheelbase and the much stiffer frame.
It is in use as my winter bike and I like the way it drives, gives me more confidence on wet tracks.

If I need to switch to another brand I would not no were to start in making a selection of brands and models.
Also I do not like the gadget stuff like Di2 and disc brakes, for me, being a long distance rider, rim brakes and mechanical shifters work fine.

Currently I am training for a cadance between 80-95 rpm and I am only using one sprocket. :-D
Ok, no hills so that helps.

 

[black lightning 1987]

Interesting that you found the CAAD7 to be lacking in bottom bracket stiffness. I have a couple of 7s here but I've never built one up. With the 50 mm diameter of the down tube I would have expected it the be very stiff at the BB. Were you pedaling at a low cadence when you rode the CAAD7?

 

[Nico]

It was an CAAD Optimo, did not have the name of CAAD7 but after some research I am sure it was a CAAD7.
Yes, the play shows when cycling at a low cadence. I could just see it swinging from left to right when powering the pedals.

But for me the thing that did it was the fact I found the bike was very uncomfortable.
Every bump in the road you felt in your arms and lower back.

So switching to carbon was one of the best things even though I was a little hesitant over potential damage to the frame when the bike is knocked over or when you have a small accident.
So far (*knock on wood) I have not had any damages to my carbon frames.

 

[JohnnyD]

It was an CAAD Optimo, did not have the name of CAAD7 but after some research I am sure it was a CAAD7.
Yes, the play shows when cycling at a low cadence. I could just see it swinging from left to right when powering the pedals.

But for me the thing that did it was the fact I found the bike was very uncomfortable.
Every bump in the road you felt in your arms and lower back.

So switching to carbon was one of the best things even though I was a little hesitant over potential damage to the frame when the bike is knocked over or when you have a small accident.
So far (*knock on wood) I have not had any damages to my carbon frames.

Road bikes is the one place I feel carbon makes sense in a road bike. You get the best of stiffness and light weight. Where as on MTB's the keep getting heavier. For instance the 2022 Jekyll in carbon weighs in at 35 lbs in CARBON! My 2004 weighs just over 31 and it's aluminium.

 

[FPrue1304]

Very interesting observation about the geometry. But I would assume you can correct slight deviations with stem, bar and seat post.

My 2019 Tarmac SW SL6 is way more comfortable over my CAAD9. And it has disc brakes. And I can put on 28 mm tires and these have significant real world advantages. Just three things that come to my mind and I am sure these apply to the Super6 as well.

The frame is also 400 gr lighter but it is not fair to compare aluminum with carbon for that purpose.

Anyways, still very much enjoying riding my CAAD9.

 

[black lightning 1987]

Will your CAAD9 not accept 28 mm tires? I thought most Cannondale road bikes would. I know I've run 28s on CAAD3-4 frames.

 

[JohnnyD]

Very interesting observation about the geometry. But I would assume you can correct slight deviations with stem, bar and seat post.

My 2019 Tarmac SW SL6 is way more comfortable over my CAAD9. And it has disc brakes. And I can put on 28 mm tires and these have significant real world advantages. Just three things that come to my mind and I am sure these apply to the Super6 as well.

The frame is also 400 gr lighter but it is not fair to compare aluminum with carbon for that purpose.

Anyways, still very much enjoying riding my CAAD9.

I still laugh a little bit when weight comparisons are made with measurements in grams. When you consider the overall weight of most adult males in the USA (195 lbs). 400 grams is just of 3/4 of a pound.. which is a pretty normal daily bowel movement in weight.
Now is the context of bike weights it is pretty important. Although on those crazy light road bikes it's even more important. I wouldn't know WHAT to do with a 15-16lbs MTB!

 

[IdahoBrett]

@JohnnyD Are you suggesting a daily bowel movement before a bike ride would improve performance due to less energy use because of less mass??

 

[JohnnyD]

@JohnnyD Are you suggesting a daily bowel movement before a bike ride would improve performance due to less energy use because of less mass??

If nothing else it would make sitting on a saddle for a few hours MUCH more comfy.

 

[kjop]

yeah, the differences in geometry aren't that much... by the way: awesome website, geometrygeeks! i think the biggest thing that has changed from the days of jan ullrich and before to now is that the riders mostly choose smaler and therefore shorter frames nowadays. and the pro cyclist are sitting more upright, instead of 'long'. using shorter handlebars... the seattube angle has changed after 2000, which brings your saddle with a 0sb-seatpost way more in front and more above the bottom bracket. and therefore you can ride way more agressive. deeper and way before the hub of the front wheel. how the people sit on their roadbikes has changed. when i see how pogacar is sitting when he is riding up a hill, then i think it looks more comfortable and 'compact' than jan ullrich did in tour de france^^

 

[FPrue1304]

Will your CAAD9 not accept 28 mm tires? I thought most Cannondale road bikes would. I know I've run 28s on CAAD3-4 frames.

I think the frame would take them. No way what concerns the fork which is from a SuperSix. Probably the original Ultra would accept, I would have to dig that out.

 

[FPrue1304]

I still laugh a little bit when weight comparisons are made with measurements in grams. When you consider the overall weight of most adult males in the USA (195 lbs). 400 grams is just of 3/4 of a pound.. which is a pretty normal daily bowel movement in weight.
Now is the context of bike weights it is pretty important. Although on those crazy light road bikes it's even more important. I wouldn't know WHAT to do with a 15-16lbs MTB!

The weight is a nice-to-have and probably the older frames compensate this with rim brakes, no electronic shifting, and so on. What matters quite a bit: comfort/compliance, wider tires, disc brakes. These you cannot easily convert onto a older frame. 28 mm was a revelation on rough roads.