geoGraphicFTD

+1
I test rode the Allez and synapse and a few others and the CAAD8 was just a world a of difference.

BarracksSi

Oh yeah, I agree -- I had a great ride on my CAAD8 once I got the right size. I was talking about how cracks & bumps felt. On the bikes with carbon seatstays, the crappiest street on my test route didn't feel bad at all; the Synapse felt much the same, with more shock absorption than I expected from an all-aluminum frame. The CAAD8 (I was also told that it's a little less harsh than the -9) was still very tolerable, though, and was even a bit smoother than the Bad Boy I got this spring.

None of them, though, would keep me from getting jounced off of the saddle by some heaves I've encountered (and, hopefully, have memorized ).

Idioteque

so did you like the CAAD9 frame significantly more than your moto champ sl?

I don't know, both full al, i like how mine rides but am looking to swap the frame within the year for something nicer. I saw a CAAD9 i think the other day, very beefy, but tempting.

ridethecliche

I never had a le champ. I had a moto Grand record.
I probably would not have bought a cannondale in addition to the le champ.

jpbrew814

i'm happy with my caad3

DocRay

Tour tested CAAD9 relative to other ally frames, gave it top marks with real data on stiffness, handling and weight, not this subjective "it feels good over bumps" crap.
Whippy frames feel good over bumps, it doesn't mean they are good frames.

BlackTie

As stated in my earlier post, I don't think the rear triangle is much different between the two. Take a look at the chain stay length:

50cm CAAD9 vs. 06 Allez

Top Tube Length 52.5cm vs. 52.5cm
Bottom Bracket Drop 7.2 vs. 7.2
Chainstay Length 40.5 vs. 40.5
Seat Tube Angle 74.5 vs. 75 (.5 difference)
Head Tube Angle 72.5 vs. 72.5
Trail 5.9 vs. 6.0 (.1 difference)
Front Center 57.2 vs. 57.7 (.5 difference)
Wheel Base 96.6 vs. 97.1 (.5 difference)
Standover Height 75.3 vs. 71.1 (4.2 difference)
Head Tube Length 11.5 vs. 11.0 (.5 difference)

Yep

Do you get a discount in kids sizes?

BlackTie

the main reason behind me asking all this is because I have an Allez Elite right now, and I'm wondering if I'd actually be able to tell the difference between my bike now and a Speedster and CAAD.

btw, how does the Speedster compare to the two?

BlackTie

haha i wish i could ride a kids size. i actually could ride a xxs 47cm scott if i wanted

grey poupon

I think it's simply the fact that Cannondale has been using alu longer than others, perhaps they have the experience (?)

I thought this link was interesting

who knows, I have an '08 caad9 5 (white) on order, the only comparison I have would be a steel lemond--from a few years ago--and a ti bike I never really rode (too big)

MIN 

Perhaps a good crit race frame, but between the ultra-stiff frame and the high bottom bracket, it didn't suit my riding style. I sold my Caad 8.

patentcad

My old CAAD3 was a great racing bike - sprinter, climber, light frame - but it was like riding a bunch of parking meter posts welded together. Terrible ride on bad roads. The most astonishing aspect of my 2007 Six13 frame is the compliance of the rear triangle (right off the CAAD8 bikes). Amazing. It feels like a stiff Ti rear triangle. Very compliant ride on rough roads. I can ride the Six13 all day long (couldn't really do that on the CAAD3) - and I think a big part of that is the aluminum rear triangle.

BarracksSi

Don't know about the Speedster...

But between the Allez and the CAAD8/9, you'll feel a smoother ride on the Allez, but more zing on the CAAD. Cruise on the Allez, hammer with the CAAD.

FIVE ONE SIX

did the guy that sold you the Allez tell you this?

rollin

Totally agree on varied tastes, I don't like the look of the Soloist so I didn't test ride it.

I found the CAAD geometry was very similar to my main bike which is a carbon Trek 5200 and I wanted something different. It is afterall my beater bike (don't tell the missus)

531Aussie

What about this guy's? Pretty hot, huh?

531Aussie

Hmmm, I've just been reading some reviews of the CAAD9. I've been saving for a Ciocc Pryde, but now I want a Cannondally

https://www.roadbikereview.com/cat/la...5_5668crx.aspx

Phantoj

I have an R4000 and love it... much more than my old 2.8
I tended to resist 100k+ training rides on my old 2.8.
With the CAAD3 based bike I now don't even think about it.
The CAAD3 is significantly smoother to ride than the older 2.8's.
The R4000 version of these is fitted with a Kestral EMS fork.
The other changes were in the re-design of the seat-tube stays.


With these changes I now consider the ride quality (buzz etc) to be as
good as any other bike I've ridden, but that doesn't change the fact
that a c-dale is stiff -- and I mean STIFF. This has many benefits, but
also means that it's totally unforgiving of road irregularities, bumps
etc. You makes yer choices and pays yer money.

-- MB.

From an April 20, 1998 USENET posting:
https://groups.google.com/group/rec.b...7608088c09c81b

It's funny how long people have been saying "The CAAD n was a buckboard but the CAAD n+1 rides like a Cadillac on a marshmellow highway..." The perception of discomfort is highly influenced by the expectation of discomfort.

ridethecliche

I love my CAAD9
I have almost 400 miles in about the past month, including my first half century. Woo!!!

UmneyDurak

Well besides riding bunch of aluminum fames and liking how CAAD8 handles the most...
CAAD frames used to be on Cannondales low to high end bikes. Same frame just different components. This indicates to me that the frame is a design and manufacturing priority for Cannondale. With other manufacturers you get different frames at different price points. This to me indicates that at lower end the design and manufacturing is just not a priority. It needs to be just "good enough", and most push their high end Carbon frames.

AkAk2000

BT,

You seem to be [naively] fixating on geometry as being the only determinant of ride quality. Here is a 30-second, off the top of my head, listing of other things regarding the frame that may affect ride quality:

-type of alloy
-size of tube
-shape of tube
-thickness and symmetry of tube
-quality of construction
-butting
-welds (type, thickness, orientation, reinforcement, etc.)
- curvature of tube
-annealing, annodizing, other treatment of tubes
- configuration of a section (e.g., in Caad frames, the rear triangle is more than just the geometry, it is the shaped seat stays, etc.)

I'm sure a more patient analysis could yield a lot more factors. It would be awesome if geometry was the only factor. We could all buy the cheapest knockoff frames, with equivalent geometry to the best frames, and save on the high prices.

I've ridden Cannondale CAAD frames, and they are much more comfortable, light, and reactive than any other aluminum frames I've ridden (durability, on the other hand, not so much). The geometry, in my opinion, is far from the determining factor. The rear triangle is key, as are the extremely thin, shaped tubes, and the overall engineering on the frame.

EffSizzle

Here's my baby. Is there anything more beautiful then a nice brushed aluminum CAAD8? I'm partial, can you tell?

On Your Right

The CADD frames are better because all things being equal with the metal, There are enough decals to substantially strengthen the frame in the event of a catastrophic metal failure!! That's why I ride a Schwinn CF bike.

EffSizzle

I know...I know....FLIP IT!!!