CAAD8 Vs. CAAD9
 

I'm buying either of these two frames with a 105 setup tomorrow.

The CAAD9 is about 200 bucks more. I weigh 145 and I'm a rec rider interested in riding centuries, I ride group rides, and I want to try my hand at racing (possibly for my university).

I just want to get feedback from people since a lot of people on here have one of these frames.

Thanks guys!

Here's what I ride. '06 CAAD8. Light as can be, considering it's aluminum. This thing is made for climbing. Incredible frame!

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1261/...121cdcbc_b.jpg

Gotta admit, that thing is sick...

I'm just curious what the weight difference between a CAAD8 and CAAD9 frame is of the same size of 54.

I had an option between a CAAD8 and a CAAD9......I went for the CAAD9 in a 54 just a bit lighter and stiffer.

Can you test ride them both. I test road a CAAD8 last spring. Very responsive but a rough ride. I did not ride a CAAD9 but was told the rear triangle was changed to give it a smoother ride. Ride to find out.

I'm looking at these bikes too. I have a co-worker (in his mid-20s) who's owned both the CAAD8 and CAAD9. He's a cat 3 sprinter and I look to him for first-hand advice these days that I'm in the market for a road bike. He says that the CAAD9 he has now is a little bit stiffer, a little bit twitchier and a little bit more responsive than the CAAD8 he had. Both are definitely racing bikes. He's only had the CAAD9 a couple of months, and I believe he's won a few races with his CAAD8 last year.

The store has neither of the bikes in a size 54, which is what he thinks I should be on. He had a 9 in 56, which felt alright to me.

He's trying to get a 54 of both bikes so I can try them out. My legs are probably fine on the 9, it's just that I have a little less reach than 'average' and the reach is a little bit long. Not uncomfortable, but on the far side of comfortable. Probably a 90 stem could fix that.

I rode an '07 CAAD8 and '08 CAAD9, granted they were different sizes, but the 9 felt that much better than the 8.

Trying to decide between the CAAD9 and Trek 1600.

I think the frame on the CAAD9 is much better than the Trek. Besides, I don't have a particular affinity for trek.

Buy the one that feels best!

I'm also trying to decide between a CAAD8 and a CAAD9.

Just mentioning that you should make the "softness" of the ride a decent priority if you plan on doing lots of centuries. I was under the impression that the CAAD series was made for stiffness and criterium style riding. However if you can fit 25s under the breaks you may be fine.

I'm young at 18, I figure I'll get used to it.

I ride with gloves most of the time, and I'd possibly put the foam inserts under the bartape if I felt too much vibration etc. So in essence, I think I could get used to it. I just don't want too upright of a bike.

I agree though, softness should be some sort of priority, but I think that can be helped with a little customization. I'm not really too into the synapses, though I might try some. Meh.

You think?

The Dura Ace Allez is less then 4000. The Dura Ace Tarmac is 5500. There's your reason. Some people may choose a DA Allez over, say, a Tarmac Ultegra. Just like in mountain bikes with hardtail vs. Full suspension, more or less. Sometimes you just want the better components.



Of course, and Dura Ace or even Ultegra bike is far out of my reach right now anyways, so I'm just speculating.

I have an LBS selling the Roubaix Comp for 1800...
I don't really want a full carbon bike yet. I don't feel I deserve one yet. Besides, I'd rather pay less for tried and true older technology and wait patiently while things get refined in the carbon dept. Carbon's a new material and it's awesome, but it can be much more awesome for less.

Btw, I have no idea what your post has to do with this thread.

Jealousy's in the air! :p



Anyways, The Cannondale is a plenty comfortable frame. I think it is so easy for everyone to remark the frame is too stiff being aluminum. These numbers should quell your fear of the frame being too harsh and uncomfortable-

Here's a snip of post from the weight weenies forum regarding a tour magazine article in regards to frame weight and stiffness.


Top ten: Weight (Tour standardized weighting [frame/fork/headset])
1. Storck Fascenario 1194g (849/299/46g)
2. Scott Addict SL 1271g (848/326/96g)
3. Lapierre X-Lite 1332g (970/294/67g)
4. Cervelo R3 Team 1333g (914/361/57g)
5. Simplon Pavo 1366g (964/345/57g)
6. Felt u.h.c. 1370g (970/349/51g)
7. Canyon F10 Ultimate CF 1419g (1027/315/77g)
8. Stevens carbon SLC 1452g (997/393/62g)
9. Isaac Sonic 07 1455g (963/423/69g)
10. Cube Litening HPC 1500g (1053/371/77g)

Top ten: STW (in Nm/°/kg)
1. Storck Fascenario 104
2. Scott Addict SL 100
3. Canyon F10 Ultimate CF 99
4. Red Bull Carbon X-Lite 98
5. Cervelo R3 Team 93
6. Simplon Pavo 92
7. Radon RCS Litening 90
8. Cube Litening HPC 85
9. Hai End Road 82
10. Cannondale System Six 78

Top ten: Comfort (spring rate in N/mm)
1. Specialized S-Works Roubaix SL 169
2. Hai Race 177
3. Giant TCR Advanced 196
4. Isaac Sonic 07 196
5. Mazzuolo Scorpio 206
6. Felt F1 u.h.c. 210
7. Rotwild RSR 1.0 216
8. Cervelo R3 Team 223
9. Cannondale CAAD9 232
10. Müsing Onroad Only Pro Carbon 233

Rest of the thread here-
http://weightweenies.starbike.com/ph...highlight=tour

Woah! 9th in comfort!
Even if that study isn't perfect, that's still pretty sweet. Pity I haven't been able to try a TCR. No one here has one in stock...

Hmm...
If the CAAD9 is so 'springy' how is it so stiff? That seems counter-intuitive, no?

(Bumpity bump)