|Litespeed vs. Cannondale Sizing||ddepiano|
Mar 3, 2003 3:10 PM
|Hey folks. I was wondering how a 2000 Litespeed Classic 56 cm frame would compare to a Cannondale Saeco CAAD 3 57 cm frame. I currently ride the Litespeed and am thinking about buying the Cannondale frame (you can never have too many bikes). My Litespeed frame fits me perfect now, but I can't get a larger size without it being too big. Would the Cannondale frame be too large for me? Please let me know what you think. Thanks!|
|re: Litespeed vs. Cannondale Sizing||Rusty Coggs|
Mar 3, 2003 3:46 PM
|Both are measured c to top of toptube.Don't know what your TT length is but the 57 Cdale caad3 has a 56.75cm TT and a 73.5* seaattube angle if that matters.|
|re: Litespeed vs. Cannondale Sizing||mke111|
Mar 3, 2003 3:50 PM
|Litespeed doesn't make a 56 frame. They make a 55 and a 57. In either event I believe the Cannondale would be slightly larger. Litespeeds are measured center to top and I'm pretty sure that Cannondales are measured center to center.|
|re: Litespeed vs. Cannondale Sizing||ddepiano|
Mar 3, 2003 4:00 PM
|My mistake. I know it isn't a 55 so it must be a 57. My top tube length is roughly 56.5 cm.|
|re: Cdale is C to top of toptube....nm||Rusty Coggs|
Mar 3, 2003 5:20 PM
|re: Litespeed vs. Cannondale Sizing||PdxMark|
Mar 3, 2003 5:19 PM
|I have a 57 cm Tuscany and a 57 cm Caad 5 Cannondale. The fits are surprisingly close, despite all the differences in how they measure.
The Caad 5 frame rides pretty well. It's not as smooth a ride as the Tuscany, but not at all bad. From what I've read, pre-Caad 4's are a different story. If the reviews I've read are right, you're in store for a very different experience from your Classic.
|re: Litespeed vs. Cannondale Sizing||russw19|
Mar 3, 2003 9:29 PM
|It's not the Cad 4 that was harsh, if that's what you are getting at. It was the Cad 3. I have one (sitting in a closet) and the Cad 3 is the one with the straight seat stays. The Cad 4 went to the curved stays to give it a little more compliance in the rear end. Bigger riders and sprinters seemed to prefer the Cad 3 from my experience and smaller, lighter riders and climber types liked the Cad 4 quite a bit more. If you want a stiff aluminum frame, the Cad 3 is great. If you want the wieght savings of an aluminum frame, but a less harsh ride, the Cad 4 was a vast improvement. The difference is often compared to aluminum frames with carbon seat stays. It just helps to soften the rear up a bit.
Here's a bit if Cannondale history with the Cad 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 road bikes.
The Cad 3 was developed to be "lighter than titanium" and in conjunction with the riders of the Saeco team.
The Cad 4 added hourglass stays and replaced the bolt thru cable stops on the downtube for derailleurs with welded stops. Meaning you must use an STI/Ergopower type shifter. Downtube shifters are not compatible.
The Cad 5 added the integrated headset design. And depending on your model, either a full carbon slice fork, or an alloy steerer model.
The Cad 6 debuted in the 2000 TDF and features the Slice Si crank-bottom bracket system. This frame will only accept a Cannondale bottom bracket and crank system until someone comes out with a conversion kit. (I have heard rumors that both FSA and Chris King have prototypes already for conversion kits, but I can not verify that)
The Cad 7 is the new Optimo tubing. I don't know the specifics as I no longer work for a Cannondale dealer, but I believe the Cad 7s are available in both the oversized Slice Si crank design, and a regular bottom bracket shell. The team issue and R5000 bikes both use the Si Hollowgram cranks, but the R3000 uses a standard Dura-Ace crank.
Hopefully that is everything you ever wanted to know about a Cannondale and more....
|re: Litespeed vs. Cannondale Sizing||Woof the dog|
Mar 4, 2003 12:53 AM
|so you are saying that today's CAAD3s are still made with straight seat stays and ride harsher?
I have the precaad one and its pretty harsh, but I am used to it. I thought cannondale improved on this by a lot.
woof the god.
|re: Litespeed vs. Cannondale Sizing||russw19|
Mar 4, 2003 4:57 PM
|I don't think they still make the Cad 3. The R400 is a Cad 4 and the R600 is a Cad 5 frame. As for calling it harsh, well I hate to use that term because I really like a stiff frame. My two road bikes I ride are a Pinarello Paris and a Colnago Ovalmaster. Both are nice stiff bikes. I wouldn't ride a Cad 4. I just think it's too whippy feeling in the rear end, but I am a pretty big guy too. I also rode an SLX bike when I was 15 and weighed 135 lbs. So I have always preferred a stiff bike. But if you are a lightweight climber type, you may feel it's harsh. It's a relative term.
|Agree: "pre-Caad 4" was just shorthand for Caad 3 & earlier nm||PdxMark|
Mar 4, 2003 8:13 AM