Commuting - Hot New Cannondales

Apologies if somebody has already posted this Velonews article about Cannondale's new urban bikelineup (http://velonews.com/article/98074/urban-renewal-cannondale-s-city-bikes).



The Quick CX Ultimate is part of the Quick urban bike series, showed last year as a concept. It's part of what Cannondale calls its “Urban Mobility Project,” and illustrates how exciting a high-tech commuter bike can be.

The Quick Carbon urban bikes bring a number of top-end technologies like BB30 and integrated headsets to a sleek carbon frame that retains practical features like rack and fender eyelets. Of course 700C wheels and clearance for cyclocross tires don’t hurt, and the flat bar is more suited to heads-up urban riding than a drop bar might be.

The Quick line also includes a series of aluminum bikes at lower prices. Quick Carbon bikes are slated for October availability.

The On is scary. I just can't get over the fact that a good half of the bike just isn't there.

That, and the fact they mix a lefty fork with a righty bike. That's just wrong.

The On is scary. I just can't get over the fact that a good half of the bike just isn't there.

That, and the fact they mix a lefty fork with a righty bike. That's just wrong.

Fixing flats without have to remove the wheels would be SWEET though! Especially for a commuter.

The On is scary. I just can't get over the fact that a good half of the bike just isn't there.

That, and the fact they mix a lefty fork with a righty bike. That's just wrong.

I just don't get C'dales compulsion to make a bike as ugly as possible.
I wouldn't use a Lefty fork if they gave me one, let alone this abomination.:twitchy:

the On = a solution in search of a problem.

Generally some sharp looking bikes, but I think most people know how I feel about carbon..........

The on looks like a structural engineer's nightmare (I have a civil/structural background, though I have specialized in project management).
Not only does the vertical axis torque have to be fully compensated near the bottom bracket, but the off-axis load (single mounting point at the hub, 60-65mm off the centerline of the bicycle) would create a nasty off-axis rotational force as well.

No thanks. If they were looking for ease of wheel removal with the IGH, I'd have gone the same route as the Swobo Baxter and designed it with paragon sliders and vertical dropouts.

Screw Cannondale.

I used to rant about them, used to love them.

However now that they've fired most of their American frame builders, I have a hard time taking them seriously.

That On design looks typical though, they always have to be different.

All that being said, my 2003 Cannondale F500 is a sweet frame.

Yeah, I can't imagine how much engineering went in to overcome the huge forces on that bracket piece, that could easily be solved with a simple seat stay, just to look cool.

Not much. Single sided swingarms have been used on motorcycles for over 2 decades now. The puny forces going through a bicycle frame are nothing compared to forces going through a motorcycle frame.

The On has no rear triangle, no seat stays and no chainstay! What keeps the bike anchored to the wheel is the fully enclosed chaincase. Yours for a MSRP of $3900!

Not much. Single sided swingarms have been used on motorcycles for over 2 decades now. The puny forces going through a bicycle frame are nothing compared to forces going through a motorcycle frame.

motorcycle frames <> bicycle frames. Wayyyyy different in many ways.

Still, your point is taken, and I'm not saying that bicycle frames can't be designed with a single-sided frame system. I'm expressing some concerns with this particular design.

motorcycle frames <> bicycle frames. Wayyyyy different in many ways.

Still, your point is taken, and I'm not saying that bicycle frames can't be designed with a single-sided frame system. I'm expressing some concerns with this particular design.

A very wise man (senior networking engineer) once told me:
"Just because something *can* be done, doesn't mean it *should* be done."

So I guess they don't expect buyers of the On to mount a rack on their bike?

The On has no rear triangle, no seat stays and no chainstay! What keeps the bike anchored to the wheel is the fully enclosed chaincase. Yours for a MSRP of $3900!

Rear fender mount is a $1000 extra.

Yes, but motorcycles have one or 2 big springs/dampers between the swing arm and the chassis (edit: same position as a seatstay, just with suspension). I think if there were some sort of (I don't know the name of this) rotational spring mechanism in the front of the hub to absorb shock, it would be pretty nifty.


Rotary dampers actually exist, although i've never seen one small enough to fit into a bicycle frame.

The On has no rear triangle, no seat stays and no chainstay! What keeps the bike anchored to the wheel is the fully enclosed chaincase. Yours for a MSRP of $3900!

*seatstays and chainstays not included.

the On = a solution in search of a problem.
+1.

And I can't imagine where they'll find that problem. Never put it past marketers though to think of something...

Screw Cannondale.

I used to rant about them, used to love them.

However now that they've fired most of their American frame builders, I have a hard time taking them seriously.

That On design looks typical though, they always have to be different.

All that being said, my 2003 Cannondale F500 is a sweet frame.

I'm not sure I dig their new frames either but I still love my Cannondale CAAD9 R2 road bike. I particularly like the "Made in USA" branding on the bike but I guess that's going away too.

a bit of perspective that makes the ON make a little more sense

it was meant to be a folding bike-the Jackknife
http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/4881/1620/1600/JackKnife300.jpg
That idea has some merits, but I guess the engineering was just too much.

They're manufacturing 200 Ons, 100 of which will be sold in the US. Let's not fly off the handle on how it represents the death of good bicycle design quite yet.

That On will be sold to a handful of rich hipsters. The kind of people who refer to every item in their household as "design".

I gotta say, I am not rich, not a hipster, yet even I can appreciate even the most lowly Walmart bike as "design". We've had many years to refine the bicycle, and we've done well. I'm not saying there's never going to be improvements, but the traditional design we have now does have a lot going for it.

a bit of perspective that makes the ON make a little more sense

it was meant to be a folding bike-the Jackknife

That idea has some merits, but I guess the engineering was just too much.

That also evolved into the On Concept in 2008, seen in the wall art here:
http://velonews.com/photo/98086
And at Cannondale's site:
http://www.cannondalecommunity.com/sketchbook/default.asp?item=298976

It had a "Righty" fork instead of a Lefty so that, when folded, it could fold pretty flat, with the fork leg on one side and the drivetrain case on the other. What just occurred to me is how loud the chain could be as it rattles around inside the case; wonder how they'll approach that.

The new carbon Quick frame looks hot. I'd just be afraid of a light pole scraping it up.

Those are some nasty (in a bad way) looking bikes.

Those are some nasty (in a bad way) looking bikes.

I bet if I put on on rivbike.com you would change your mind :p

I've owned several Cannondales over the years and I like all the innovation they do... but they walk away from so much of their stuff after a few years. Try getting parts to rebuild a headshock from 2000 from them... I did, and you can't. I don't blame them entirely, that's part of being an innovator. For my commuting bikes, though, I'd like to have something I can rebuild in a decade.

2008 C-dale Road Warrior. No Road Warior tags on the frame, dangit.
There is a made in the USA sticker on the top tube.