|Lightest alluminium cyclocross frame in the world??||Shanks23|
Jul 16, 2003 8:38 AM
|Does the Cannondale CycloCross disc bike, use the lightest cyclocross frame in the world? I think so... If you look at the picture, you will see it's written Optimo on the seat tube. Optimo is only used in Cannondale's CAAD7 frames, the lightest alluminium frames in the world, according to them: http://www.cannondale.com/bikes/innovation/caad7/
What do you folks think of this bike? Think it's the lightest cyclocross out there?
Bike page is here:
|Maybe, maybe not.||seamus|
Jul 16, 2003 9:14 AM
|Wow it's pretty nice lookin', too. I'm sure it's very, very light, but I'd wager that being a cyclocross bike, they use a little beefier tube stock than what they use in the road frames. Or at least, I sure hope so.
As for being the lightest out there, I'd bet there are lighter carbon (AME) cross forks out there, and I've seen scandium AL bikes with nice wheels, etc weigh in at 15.5 or something ridiculous like that. Me, I prefer steel frames that weigh a little more and handle more of a beating, but for racing, I'm sure that Cannondale would be great.
Jul 16, 2003 9:26 AM
|Nice spot! I think someone at Cannondale goofed on this one. As I understand it, this model is just the disc version & better equipped XR800.
Any idea how much more it costs over the standard XR800 Or Headshok?
Jul 16, 2003 6:07 PM
|XR800 $1,100 USD
I am going from memory because I can't find my research notes but am certain these numbers are very close to retail price.
Jul 17, 2003 1:36 AM
|XR1000 = $1499 US (this model)
XR800 HeadShock = $1299 US
XR800 = $1099 US
But if you look at there top of the line Team Replica, it looks exactly the same, except for the stays and fork. The stays are larger on the cyclocross and the fork speaks for itself.
|Extra $400 for Ultegra & Optimo ????||arctic hawk|
Jul 17, 2003 3:44 AM
|I just can't seem to see Cannondale using top of the line frame material on a CX bike.
I can understand the price difference from the base XR800 Tiagra/105 vs XR1000's 105/Ultegra (not to mention the disc brakes, of course). Perhaps someone here has seen the actual thing & can comment upon it. But I personally do not trust that picture.
|come on shanks...||dpb|
Jul 17, 2003 5:09 AM
|Surely you're not the one to be trusting pictures. If it were CAAD7 or optimo, they'd at least be trying to sell it as such. You don't just sneak a high-end tubeset into bike spec and hope nobody notices. The frame is listed as Cyclocross Si Disc, vs CAAD7 Optimo Si for that nice roadie you provided.
|come on shanks...||Shanks23|
Jul 17, 2003 9:57 AM
|They have to change the name of the frame because of the stays... and fork. I emailed Cannondale and I'm waiting to hear back from them. The pictures are authentic by the way, both displayed directly from the Cannondale web site. I just pasted in the URL link to them.
I can't tell the difference except for the stays and fork. The rest looks identical. Strangely enough Damian, they both mension Si and both use Optimo... Can't wait to see what Cannondale's answer is. If it is CAAD7, this bike has AMAZING VALUE.
|How about $1149 US?||Shanks23|
Jul 17, 2003 11:51 AM
|Yup!! In Orlando Florida:
52 CM (Too small for me, but still a great deal)
Jul 17, 2003 11:16 AM
|I have confirmed that the CycloCross Disc IS using CAAD7 technology for it's frame, but the frame is made differently then the road frame which is why they gave it a different name. Main difference being the more solid/rigid back stays.
This is a sweet cx bike to get for the price. Must be light as hell too. I will definitely be looking into this one.
Jul 17, 2003 3:12 PM
|Every review I've seen put it at 22 lbs.|
Jul 18, 2003 6:11 AM
|I have to play devil's advocate on this one...and I do this mostly to stimulate discussion, not to dis the bike. In fact, I'd love to get my hands on one of these if I didn't have a sweet ride already.... But the phrase you quoted really suggests some BS from cannondale's marketing department. "Uses CAAD7 Technology" could mean absolutely anything...probably built in the same factory or something...made from the discarded tubes from botched road frames ;) Just kidding. I'm just bitter. Do they say anything about the optimo tubing? Because if they're 'not telling the truth' in their photo, I'd trust 'em about as far as I could throw 'em regarding they're emails as well.
And keep in mind you can make a HEAVY bike from anything from magnesium to alu to ti to carbon. My oversized alu specialized s-works clocked in at ~3.5# I think. Cross frames are never going to get super-light like the roadies...we just need more material. And unless the component spec is stellar / swanky, the overall bike weight has its restrictions as well.
Give me a few days, I'll post a message about why I take the perspective I do on your posts, and explain my bike / life philosophies a little better.
|a few other things||OffRoadTourer|
Jul 18, 2003 6:38 AM
|Firstly, disc brakes will always be heavier than v's or cantis. Disc hubs and rotors will always add to the overall weight. It can't be the lightest CX bike in the world because the cantilever brake version would be lighter.
Secondly, the under-the-top-tube cable routing is inappropriate for shouldering in CX racing. This is basic stuff. Doesn't mean it isn't a nice bike, just not a true CX racer perhaps.
Thirdly, lightest does not equal best. There was a trend about 7 or 8 years ago in XC mountain biking to go crazy light. Then people started crashing with catastrophic equipment failures. Off-road riding requires a certain level of strength that is compromised by going too light.
Lastly, having a fab-o bike is pointless if you ride like a putz. Just buy a bike, any bike and RIDE it. It's the riding, not the bike, that makes you a rider.
|Not CAAD7 tech||arctic hawk|
Jul 18, 2003 10:25 AM
|I spoke with the nice people at Cannonale customer service. Yes, they are using Optimo tubing. But due to the cx configuration, it is NOT CADD7 or CADD technology as used in their thoroughbreds.
This is the reason they call the frame Cyclocross SI Disc. I would believe that the Optimo tubing allows them to reduce the material used(as per Cannondale's website) on their existing beefy cx frame & get the same strength.
Overall, I am guessing, that the weight reduction in the frame would be offset by the weight gain of the brake components, not to mention the Cannondale quirkiness of mixed components, in this case, 105/Ultegra. Why not simply Ultegra or 105 or in the case of the XR800, Tiagra.
|Optimo Update||arctic hawk|
Jul 21, 2003 8:18 AM
|I spoke with the kind folks of customer service at Cannondale. A fine young lady has given me some interesting news regarding Optimo tubing on the CX bike.
ONLY the downtube uses Optimo tubing.
|You missed the biggest difference...||Frank Tuesday|
Jul 18, 2003 3:57 PM
|BB and Crank.
The CAAD 7 uses the super stiff and light oversized BB and matching cranks.
The crosser uses ISIS Truvativ cyclocross cranks.
Probably a 300g difference in weight, and a huge difference in stiffness.
|optimo refers to their new frame material...||marcoxxx|
Jul 21, 2003 1:11 PM
|i think..? a new lighter stronger alumium and very dingable.
|nice bike but can it put up with the abuse?||snakedust|
Jul 23, 2003 5:17 PM
|light weight and abuse dont always go too well|
|re: Lightest alluminium cyclocross frame in the world??||blewByU2|
Jul 25, 2003 1:13 PM
|What's with the cable routing under the top tube!?! I started laughing when I saw this. Not an issue if the bike will never be carried, but uh... I think it's suppose to be a top of the line cross rig, right? And how about those disc brakes??? Yeah the frame needs to be super light to offset the extra weight of disc brakes. PLUS, they're mechanical brakes, not hydraulic - big difference in-terms of braking performance.
Save you money and build a much lighter and better performing Ridley, Empella, Salsa, or the like. BTW, Cannodale does make some great bikes (I own two), but this is not one of them when it comes to cross.