surreal

i just did a search for "cannondale" on this forum, and i didnt come up with anything specific to these touring bikes here. mentions were made here and there in other threads, but no in-depth posts on the bikes were to be found, least not easily.

one of the things i did find, which i had already considered, was that aluminum frames arent the preferred stuff for tours. if i'm gonna do some loaded touring, i guess this is a concern. regardless of who wants to say that they dont believe that the aluminum will hold up to loaded tours forever, i was wondering if anyone here had firsthand experience with these bikes (the t800 or the t2000) and could tell me just how well they hold up on loaded tours. i used to really wanna get a steel bike, but i want some lbs support, and most good touring bikes dont appear in shops.

so, i guess i'm looking at trek 520 (which has been discussed here endlessly) and cannondale t800. i've found some VERY good info on the 520 right here on the blt vs 520 thread...who here has a cannondale touring bike that wants to talk about it? (or knows someone who tours on a cannondale touring bike)...

tia,
-rob

Frazer Huang

hello Friend.

There is no need to worry about the durability of cannondale frame. It come with a life time warranty. If this reputable company can offer such assurance, there is no need to worry that it will broke down halfway during your trip. (If it does, ask them for a new one)

Nowadays alumimum frame are quite strong materials. it is a popular materials for cross country mountain bike which are given rugged handling. so when there is no problem with it, it will be fine to be used on tour bike

My friend have been riding on a cannondale alumimum bike for almost a year. so far there is no complain . it is a comfortable and solid bike. (as rigid as a steel bike.)

However, I see a problem with an aluminum frame, it cannot be cutted and coupled like a waterpipe (S & S coupling). This is a useful poccess that make a bike easy for transport during travelling. so if you dont considered doing it to your frame in future. it will be fine to own one aluminum bike!

MichaelW

Sometime contributor and global tourist Roughstuff used on on his global tour
https://www.cyclingscholar.com/compeq.html

Also used for a circular tour around Australia.
'Dale tourers are strong, tough and well proven over many years. They dont just break and are quite a bit stronger than the lightweight road racing bikes. The extra stiffness of fat tubing is better suited to large sizes.

You cant add or move attatchment points, like you can with steel braze-ons.
Ive never met anyone trust a repair of a lightweight steel tourer to a village blacksmith, more used to fixing agricultural machinery.

zlj75

I think the main concern people have is not with C-Dale touring bikes, but aluminum touring bikes in general, which are very stiff. Steel and titanium are not nearly as stiff as aluminum, so over the course of a long day they are much more comfortable. Good luck, I'm in the process of deciding on a new touring rig as well. Have you taken a look at the REI brand Novara, they make a touring bike called the Randonee, which I think is a heck of a bike for the money.

cycletourist

About 5 years ago I test rode a Cannondale touring bike at A&B cycles in Springfield Mo. It was one of the most comfortable bikes I have ever ridden - but I didn't have enough money and they wouldn't come down on the price.

CrocDundee

I really wanted a Cannondale (CD) touring bike too but was well aware that an Aluminum frame is much stiffer than steel and therefore less comfortable over many kms. So I looked at their other models, ones with suspension to soak up all those little bumps. I just bought a Silk Warrior 700 which has front Headshox suspension so you can still use a low-rider pannier rack, plus seat post suspension so your butt doesn't take a beating. I haven't ridden it much yet but I think it will be a nice tourer. It has the usual braze-ons, 700 tires and long wheel base - all good for touring. I did change the gearing to the same as their touring bikes with 28/38/48 up front and an 11-34 rear cog set. You can order this bike with either drop handlebars or straight with bar-ends. Your LBS can make any other modifications you desire. Check out their website for more info.


Cheers
Ben

Michel Gagnon

With today's designs and production technique, the aluminum vs steel debate is a moot one. There are good points on the Cannondale Touring bikes, and, as far as I could see on the Touring list (see https://search.bikelist.org ), there are a few drawbacks.

1. I heard more problems with rear wheel failures on Cannondale touring bikes than on the Trek 520. Failures ranged from wheels that didn't stay true to numerous broken spokes to cracked rims. WHy? I can't say whether it is because more people on the touring list have a Cannondale bike, because those who have them are harder on bikes (or ride on rougher grounds, or because wheels aren't as good as those on the Trek 520. Looking at the tire width of a Conti Top Touring 700x32 once installed on my Trek 520 vs another listmember's Cannondale touring bike (I don't know which one), I suspect his rims are narrower than mine.

I've also read from one guy that there is ample clearance on front for 700 x 41 mm (real width 37 mm), but that on the rear, it was limited to 700 x 37 (real width 32 mm on his bike). The Trek 520 only has clearance for 700 x 32 front (real width 31 mm on my bike), but for more than 700 x 37 rear (real width 37 mm). So, regarding wheels and tires, the Trek has an advantage.

2. Gearing is a bit lower on the Cannondale, with 28-38-48 and a 11-34 cassette, whereas the Trek has 30-40-52 with a 11-32 cassette.
Hardcore loaded tourers and people who ride in steep environment will want lower gearing, but for everyone except those who ride on flat terrain, the Trek gearing is well suited to sporty rides whereas the Cannondale gearing gives 1 or 2 lower ratios and would suit many or most tourers as is. Advantage Cannondale, except for hardcore loaded tourers who will want to change chainrings anyway -- then it's a draw.

3. The Trek uses V-brakes and Diacompe 287 V levers. V-brakes are easy to adjust, make a clean line, and using Diacome levers mean *no* Travel Agent (which eats into cables). However, brakes have to be close to the rims, and even if the wheels are strong, it doesn't leave a place for error. Still, in 2 years, I never had brake rub. The Cannondale use cantilever brakes, which are a bit less easy to adjust, but which may be adjusted to wider gaps between brake pads and rims.
Advantage Cannondale.

4. The Trek is one of the few bikes using barend shifters. By default, the left shifter always work in friction, which means "use whatever chainrings you want". The right shifter can also be used in friction, which is good if you're fed up of adjusting the barrel screw, have a gummy setup (I do in Winter), or if you bend the derailleur in an accident. Cannondale uses STI, which lacks all the above "tolerance", and if a STI lever breaks on the road, you're stuck... or nead to replace it with a set of downtube levers you have carried around.
Advantage Trek. However, it's mostly a matter of personal preference.

5. The Trek uses a lot of Shimano parts of the drivetrain (good or bad, I'll let you judge), whereas on the Cannondale, most of these are Coda, their own private brand. How does Coda compare to Shimano, I don'T know.

6. In theory, a steel frame could be repaired on the road by any welder. However, this applies to lugged frames, because current TIG-welded steel frames either need a TIG repair, or a really skilled welder to repair with a torch. So repairing a broken TIG-welded steel frame in a small village is probably as difficult as repairing a broken aluminum frame.

Buddha Knuckle

I have a tiny thing to add, even though Magnolv posted an excellent review of the topic at hand.

I tour with a slim tubed 4130 chro-mo old school mountain bike frame. I love it, but with 25+ lbs slung on the rear rack, you really notice the frame's inherent flexiness - esp in the rear triangle and lateral flex at the bottom bracket. The bike is cushy and springy alright, but sometimes I wonder how much more (subjectively) responsive a alum frame would feel. So this eventually boils down to user preference, because a noodly frame and a stiff frame will both get you to the top of a long mountain pass. Some folks prefer the micro-damping springiness of steel tubes while others prefer the relative rigidity of alum. The c'dale frames come with chro-moly forks, so the front ends on both the 520 and the c'dales should transmit similar levels of shock. The difference in vertical compliance in the rear triangles of the two bikes can be overcome with wide tires, a suspension seat post, and/or a gel seat. You cannot modulate the way bottom bracket stiffness affects the "feel" of the ride, however. Like I said earlier, I love touring on my steel bike, but the amount of flex can be nauseating for some.
One last thing - you cannot understand what a bike will feel like on a loaded tour unless you actually load it (~15-25lbs is fair) for your test ride. It is a gross understatement to say that a bike's handling changes when it is loaded.

Peace
BK

surreal

thank you,everyone, for your input. this has been quite informative. i've always seen this discussion as more of a steel vs aluminum issue, rather than an issue about canondale bikes. i just mentioned the c-dale bikes specifically b/c they are the only aluminum touring bikes i'm at all familiar with...

i dont think i'll have a problem putting miles on an aluminum frame bike from a comfort standpoint, as i already to that on my current ride, and comfort isnt really an issue. i was worried more about whether or not it can handle a load, and y'all have set those worries aside for me.

so now, i have to think more about specs and my needs, and of course i gotta test-ride the bikes. the info you have all provided me with will help me a lot in the decision, but if anyone else wants to add their $.02, i'm all ears!

thanks again,
-rob

bikeboy

My $.02 worth...

In November I got a heckuva deal on a T2000, as it was a couple model-years old.

It replaced a 10-year-old Cannondale road bike, that was my all-time favorite bike. We went 50,000+ miles together, and survived several spills and two bike/car accidents (not serious, thank goodness... here I am!). Things are BULLETPROOF!!

Since November, I've added full fenders and lights to the T2000, and have logged about 4000 miles. I have NOT used it for any touring, although I want to. (I'd get a BOB trailer, rather than panniers, etc. - just a matter of personal preference.) It's my "ultimate commuting machine" - I bike-commute year 'round.

Comparing it with the C'Dale road bike - the touring bike definitely has a softer ride, with its stretched wheelbase and slightly-fatter tires (I use 38s in the winter, and a 25/32 combination when the weather's nice). The rear wheel was so tight on the road bike, that 25 was the widest tire I could use, without it rubbing against the front derailleur mechanism. Love how they roll, but they're a bit too flat-prone for my ideal.

I can't attest to how it'll hold up under touring load, but... I'm a "super human" at 6'3" and about 240lbs. You AND your gear likely don't weigh in at 240! (I'm just "big boned" - ha-ha-ha! No... I love the chocolate. That's my downfall. Now that I think about it... I love 'most all food.) I'm currently running a "small" gearset on the crank (the biggest wheel is 42 or 44 or so) - I've bought a "road" triple crank that goes up to 53 that I'll probably stick on there next spring. (It's currently too easy to roll faster than I can pedal, if I'm going down any kind of decline, and I hardly ever go to granny gear.)

I'm totally confident that looking back 10 years from now, the T2000 will be my all-time favorite bike.

neguypdx

Hi all,

I have a T800 and have done a couple of overnight fully loaded short tours. It has worked great and is super comfy for me. I can't really make any claims about the stock parts that the T800 comes with. I was in a bike accident with a car on my T900 which cannondale no longer makes. Insurance replaced the bike, and Cannondale has a lifetime insurance warranty so I got the T800 frame for practically nothing (okay, only $275) and got new Mavic rims and parted out my damaged bike to the new frame. It is great so far! There are several design improvements I noticed between the T900 and T800 frames. Hopefully no more bike/auto accidents.....too scary.

Later

Buddha Knuckle

Gotta brag

After 5 months of hunting I scored a new Cad2 T700 frame&fork (&headset, bb, fr dereailleur) for $200 flat. Can you dig it? Touring bikes are the last decent deal on Ebay, it seems.

BK

deadlytreddly

Hi, Does anybody have any experience with the Cannondale Rohloff Tourer ?https://gb.cannondale.com/bikes/09/ce/model-9TS1.html

I have the opportunity to buy one; but not test it beforehand. On paper it looks great but i have heard so little about them compared to, say, Thorn's rohloff range.

Any input appreciated.

BigBlueToe

I've never ridden a Cannondale touring bike, but I've been reading this and other forums for a long time. I've heard many people give their impressions of them, and they have been very favorable. I recall someone saying that they were a trifle stiff unloaded, but downright comfortable when carrying camping gear.

Cave

2006 T800. I bought a size too small and have trouble with toe overlap. Otherwise it is a very good bike. I'll comment on the frame last.

Gearing is perfect with a trekking triple and 11-34 at the back. Never run out of gears at the top or the bottom.

Brakes on mine needed a little adjustment and the stock pads are pretty useless. Put on a decent pair of Koolstop or BBB pads and you'll be fine.

Cockpit is OK.
The brifters are good, my 105s have survived a couple of crashes and are easy to adjust because of the barrell adjusters right in front of you. I'd go the same again.
The handlebars are OK, but I think next time I'd go for a set that let both the flats and the drops sit horizontally - the cinello vai bars mean that one or the other is at about a 30° angle to horizontal.

Wheels. Again OK - adequate but not top shelf.
My back wheel needed to be trued a couple of times. I had it done properly in early 2007 (start of my Tasmanian ride) and have had no problems since. No probs at all with the front.
I think the Michelin tyres on the T800 are terrible (the T2K came with Schwalbe marathons). They ride fine, but pick up gravel which wears through and after a relatively short distance (about 2000km) I started getting lots of flats.
I'd swap out the tyres and get the wheels hand-trued, then you'll be fine.

Clearances are fine. 37mm no problem; I reckon the back would go a little wider with mudguards but not much. The front has more clearance, but I'd worry about toe overlap if you went too large.
Mudguards fit fine. There is only one eyelet at the back, so the mudguard stays go between your rack stay and the frame unless you have mounting points on the rack. This could have been done a little better.

Hardware like the saddle (fizzik rondine) and rack (blackburn) are fine. Cork bar tape, fine. No complaints. The saddle is pretty good for a stock one.

And now the frame.

Geometry is overall well suited to touring and general riding, with the caveat that you have to watch for toe overlap if it bothers you. Some people don't mind this at all.
The handling is secure in pretty much all conditions, from slow riding in traffic to 75km/h downhill with a full camping load. Very sure and stable.
Sharp turns are OK as long as you don't get your toe caught on the front wheel; it's a bit of a problem on uphills, but otherwise fine. It is easy to keep the bike upright on sharp turns.
There is no heelstrike even with my relatively huge shoes (size 46 on a M frame - 42 would be more average for this size).

Stiffness of the frame goes with the territory. A touring frame needs to be stiff. This one fits the bill.
Along with stiffness, I guess vibration dampening (for want of a better term) would be desirable. The frame dosen't do this well unloaded - it fells stiff. With a load on it is fine, it is actually more comfortable.
I'm not saying it is an uncomfortable bike, far from it, but one of your concerns seems to be the effect of the frame stiffness on the quality of the ride. I'd say it improves the ride when loaded, but makes it a little less comfortable unloaded. If you run 32mm or larger tyres I don't think you'd notice.

Attachment points suffer a little on this frame. The bolt hole threads are aluminium, and you have to be a bit careful not to cross-thread them. Lube the bolts and you'll be fine. Also, the clearances inside the frame at the back are tight, so you can't use a bolt and nut setup if you do somehow strip the threads.
Also with the compact frame, the bottle cages are a little close together on the smaller sizes (eg. my M frame won't take a full-size bottle under the down tube).

Finish quality is beautiful. My favourite was the blue and silver (2005? 2006? Also I think the 2008s had this). The bike looks great and the finish reflects the relatively high cost of the bike (it's one of the more expensive tourers you find in Australia).

Overall I'd say buy the bike if you're getting a larger size, or are heavy, and use it loaded up most of the time. Test ride first to get an idea of toe overlap and ride quality. Be a little careful with the bolts when mounting things.

If you're short and worry about toe overlap then get a different bike.

LetDiceFly

My only problem with Cannondale touring bikes is the fact that most of them are not for sale in the United States. Sorta ironic for a US Company.

vik 

I helped a friend buy a touring bike and she ended up with a Cannondale T800. She quite likes it and my assessment is that it makes a very capable touring bike. I've owned a couple Cannondale MTBs and a Cannondale road bike - all have been quite good. I'd buy another Cannondale if it met my needs.

Looking at the bike you linked to:

- I like the Rohloff cable routing and the fact it comes with the EX mechanism which is more easily repairable in the field and makes wheel removal a snap
- the eccentric BB is a good idea for easy wheel removal and easy adjustment [Cannondale's wedge style EBB can seize so be sure to follow any manufacturer's recommendations to keep that from happening]
- I like the Brooks saddle
- I'm not keen on a suspension seatpost [I'd rather have a sprung Brooks less to go wrong]
- I like the Tubus racks
- I like the fenders you just need to add a longer front mudflap...
- I like the Ergon grips
- I'm sure the frame and welds will be top quality
- I'm not sold on the front suspension...it will help with riding on rough roads, but it adds complexity and a potential vulnerable spot. Getting replacements and service will be a challenge in many places. This ends up being a pro and a con depending on how you choose to view it. A classic steel touring fork would give you many of the benefits with zero maintenance.
- I'm not sold on hydraulic brakes for a touring bike. On the plus side Magura brakes work well and are robust. On the down side if something happens field servicing will be a problem. V-brakes don't have this risk. You have to decide how big an issue this is.

You asked about the Thorn Rohloff bikes and a comparison. The short answer is Thorn is a small operation that specializes in hardcore expedition touring bikes. The designer of their bikes [Andy B] does a big trip every year to test equipment and validate existing designs. He comes back from those trips and makes their bikes better. You can call up their shop and speak directly to him about your needs and what bike would be best. That's pretty amazing.

Ultimately the difference between a Thorn and the Cannondale can be summed up by a different philosophy - Thorn bikes are overbuilt rugged, they go for reliable and field serviceable components that won't leave you stranded or wreck your tour. They only make a few bikes and they put all their attention into each design. Cannondale is a much bigger company with a lot of staff and a love for the latest technology so they go for things like suspension, hydraulic brakes...they also like to design/build their own products like the head shock. I've owned a headshok and when they work they are great, but I've had one [my friend's MTB] fail on a trip and we couldn't get it fixed quickly since it's a proprietary part that only a few LBS can service. On a MTB that's an inconvenience on a touring bike that could be a trip ender.

If you gave me a choice between a Cannondale Rohloff touring bike or a Thorn Rohloff touring bike - I'd buy the Thorn every time. I like small specialty operations they do a few things really well, but don't try and do everything- they get the details right because they actually ride the bikes and tour. They will also support you quickly when something goes wrong because they know how big an impact of a bike problem can have on your tour. Plus I have to say I love the ability to call up the guy that designed the bike you are riding. I recently bought a Thorn Rohloff specific MTB frame for these very reasons.

Cannondale makes great bikes and I like the fact they embrace new technology. They would both be good choices - just quite different philosophies from very different companies.

BTW - here is a review of a non-Rohloff Cannondale touring bike with a similar spec to what you are considering. You may or may not find it helpful in making your decision.

Cave

These forks are solid . They don't flex much at all. They're nothing like the finely tapered steel forks on my Gitane. They're more like the forks on an old rigid MTB.

cyberpep

I have ridden my T2000 thousands of km's loaded and not loaded. You will never have a frame problem. This is one of the most solid touring bikes you will ride. My 2006 was ready to tour on right out of the box, just add a front rack and fenders and off you go.
Me + bike + load = 320 lb and not a problem, wheels are bomb proof.
You really have to test ride other bikes if you can, for me the T2000 was the right fit. You will likely wear out before the bike does.
There are lots of folks on the BF who tour on a Cannondale with good results. Happy touring!

vik 

I just thought I'd point out the OP post is from 2002. The first post in 2008 is asking about this Cannondale touring bike only available in Europe. It's quite different than the T800 & T2000 you can buy here.

ChrisH120

The guy from https://www.transamericatrailcycle.com/ did the TransAm on one of the new european cannondale bikes. Have a read, I don't remember reading about any faults.

MichaelW

The stiffness of 'dales is due to their fat tubes. This is a positive advantage in larger sizes and 'dales are by repute a "big guy's" tourer. I wouldnt advise one for a lightweight, small woman.
Aluminium is also used by Koga for their tourers and this seems to be the bike of choice for European expedition tourists.

Cave

I've test ridden the derailleur version but not the Rohloff. On road only.

26 x 2" Marathons, headshock with lockout, all the usual braze-ons.

The ride is pretty similar to a hybrid-ish Cannondale MTB I quite like, the Terra. Stable on road, handles like a road tourer pretty much. You can do tighter turns due to no toe overlap, but it dosen't have the really fast steering of some MTBs.
It is comfortable to ride except that the flat bars are not quite to my liking. I prefer bar ends to the ergon grips.
The headshock dosen't bounce too much, but can be locked out with a lever on the stem. Seems to work OK over speed bumps and cobblestones. Not sure about off-road or drops though.

If you're happy with the headshock it seems a very good MTB tourer - expensive though. I think I prefer it to the Koga Miyata world tourer because I'd want the standover clearance and the suspension for an off-road tour. I guess the advantage of the Koga is no worries about finding a headshock if anything breaks down.

cyclotoine

HOLY CRAP THAT IS AWESOME! I didn't even know this existed and I work at a Cannondale dealer, I'll be talking to the rep next week about getting one of these over hear. Pretty much the best looking off the shelf trekking I have seen to date...

BTW I think the T1 and T2 which is what they are calling the C-dales now are some of the best production touring bikes available. Tons of tire clearance and good specs. I appreciate that these frames are stiff, you need only ride a larger sized lugged steel frame from the 1980s loaded to know why.... pool noodle.

cyclotoine

I read on the downtheroad.com that the koga-miyata uses a proprietary headset though which could be a royal pain.. not sure if they have addressed this now.