BikerDoug
friend
Reged: 12/29/03
Posts: 88
|
|
They may be painting it white, but we all know carbon has a black heart!
From the Cyclingnews.com website:
"Cannondale has for years been experimenting with carbon fiber, usually in conjunction with the company's long-time favourite material, aluminium. But the latest road frame from the Bethel Connecticut bike builder doesn't mix carbon with anything: the Synapse is 100 percent carbon fiber."
Eventually Moots, Seven, et. al. will cave and come out with all carbon frames as well. They will finally have to admit what we Calfee riders have known all along! 
|
vaxn8r
contributor
Reged: 12/19/03
Posts: 222
|
|
I saw the Synapse yesterday. I think it's around 16lbs with Ksyrium SL's and a CF Coda crank. It has a bit longer HT than the six-13 and the Caad's. I believe it has a slightly longer wheelbase as well. So it ought to be a just a bit more upright and a tad comfier than their racing frames.
It doesn't appear to be quite as laid back as the Specialized Roubaix...but is along those lines. In other words, it will not be directly competing with their other racing frames, though one could easily race it.
I'm not keen on the finish. Kind of a charcoal matte black with clearcoat decals showing just the CF weave.
I didn't ride it...yet.
|
Bruce
contributor
Reged: 12/27/03
Posts: 133
Loc: North of NYC
|
|
The press release is a complete riot:
http://forums.roadbikereview.com/showthread.php?p=254492#post254492
They sound like Colnogo with their "S.A.V.E technology (Synapse Active Vibration Elimination) in the chain-stays and fork provide a pinpoint balance of vibration absorbing comfort and lateral performance stiffness." What kind of baloney is this? I guess the CDale dumba**es that think their superstiff road frames are great will eat this garbage up no problem.
Also they had to make them in Taiwan, no CF manufacturing expertise in the good old USA. I can't wait to see the web site on May 1 where they will talk about their "years of experience in composite materials" when it turns out that they hired the guy from the Calfee mail room! It will be priceless.
Why don't the just say the truth: We have no clue about carbon frames, but our AL frames suck, and not one wants them any more anyway, and carbon frames from other makers are selling well, so we bought out some extra CF manufacturing capacity in a plant in Taiwan that makes CF bikes for Specialized, Fuji and about 10 other guys, and painted them so you can't see the defects and bondo in the CF, and slapped together this lame marketing hype, and now we have a "me too" carbon frame to sell to the masses that hear that CF is the frame material of choice.
I will now have to kid the one serious rider I know that still thinks Cannondales are good bikes.
|
Pintsized
journeyman
Reged: 02/27/05
Posts: 90
Loc: Corvallis OR
|
|
Gee, isn't that a little harsh apropos the bike itself? I won my first race on an R 500 Cdale with a triple that cost one third what my new Luna did. I dearly love my new Luna...already. But I sort of feel like I have lost a little innocence. I mean, once there was this time where I rode what I had, and I didn't care. I just did it. DIdn't you, too, start out with something else that only belatedly appeared not so hot?
Whatever it's faults, then or now, my little Cdale got me thru an inside corner and I won a bunch sprint. I don't think any win will ever mean as much. And I willl frame that Cdale one day and hang it in my den.
I agree with you about their Johnny come lately-ism.
|
bike_boy
new member
Reged: 03/09/05
Posts: 10
Loc: East Texas
|
|
I am going to have to agree w/ BikerDoug. Companies that do not offer some significant Carbon product, are going to be struggling, be it Ti or Al. The days of aluminum being the "material of choice" is coming (or has come) to a close. I am disappointed that C-Dale had to look to Asia for there 1st all-carbon "wonder", but I do think that w/out such a product, their fate would be sealed. While I cannot claim to have spent much time thinking about a C-Dale (though they are one of two companies that make stock road-tandems that fit my wife and I, so I did spend some time thinking about one), I have respected that their frames have always been built on this side of the pond. Thus, there is a little part of me that is in morning w/ this decision. However, w/ Carbon's move into continually lower price points, this may help Ti-manufactures as they will still have an exclusive aura to them. But what does it say when your new Ti bike has a carbon rear-end?
Edited by bike_boy (04/19/05 04:32 AM)
|
Insightdriver
captain
Reged: 03/07/04
Posts: 472
|
|
Bruce, could you explain your obvious elitist prejudice against Cannodale in particular? I doubt you said much that is factual in your post. I do think, however your opinion is shouted out clearly so well that an idiot would hear it.
The obvious reason for any manufacturing company to go to Taiwan is because of price. The technology and quality are the same as the US in almost everything now but their workers work for a fraction of the pay union workers get in the US.
The reason for paint has nothing to do with hiding defects, it is an added layer of protection for the notch-sensitive and ultraviolet-sensitive carbon composite structure. Most people prefer a nice paint job over nude or clear-coated carbon bikes.
Those who value expensive and custom bicycles should still understand the bicycle market. For everyone who agrees with your elitist attitude I can find a dozen who would convince the majority of people that spending thousands of dollars on a bicycle is foolish.
I don't mean to diss you man, but you made a post that clearly shows how you feel, not what you know.
|
bfd
journeyman
Reged: 12/22/03
Posts: 77
|
|
Bruce's attack shows only that he is nothing more than a poseur wannabe! Hey, it ain't your little calfee that will make you any faster, its still the "engine".
Put any decent cat-whatever bike rider on a C'dale and he will still kick-ass on Bruce and the rest of the wannabes who "think" they are faster because they have a Calfee/Parlee/Crumpton/Colnago/I'mfasterthanshitonmyUS-madecarbon bike, to that I say CRAP!
Good Luck with all that, hahahahahahaha
|
flythebike
captain
Reged: 08/26/04
Posts: 272
Loc: N. Virginia, USA
|
|
Cunego and Simoni have clearly shown that Cannondales are still raceworthy frames.
|
skuke
captain
Reged: 12/22/03
Posts: 323
|
|
Quote:
flythebike wrote:
Cunego and Simoni have clearly shown that Cannondales are still raceworthy frames.
They would kick my butt while riding a Big Wheel! :-)
--------------------
Skuke
95 Carbonframes Tetra Pro
92 Bridgestone MB-1
90 Moser 51.151
|
Insightdriver
captain
Reged: 03/07/04
Posts: 472
|
|
shhhhhhh....
hear that?....
Hmmmm.
No response to a serious inquiry.
Cannodales Rock!
|
skuke
captain
Reged: 12/22/03
Posts: 323
|
|
Quote:
Insightdriver wrote:
Cannodales Rock!
I currently have no opinion about C'Dales. However, in the late 80s and early 90s, their quality sucked. Find a frame from that era and look down the length of any tube. Nary a tube was straight. They were all bent and curved from crappy welding.
I have no evidence, but based on my 20+ years as a machinist, it looks as though they were improperly tacked together (if at all) prior to welding. That, compounded with crappy miters on the tube ends causes a tube to pull to one side as it's being welded. I'm sure the welding was done on a fixture, so they were "locked" in place but as soon as it's removed, the welding stresses would tweak the frame and it would need to be cold set. It would need to bent back into the right position(s) which caused all the crookedness of the tubes.
I also saw one frame stripped of paint and it had Bondo (or similar) on the welds. Looks great when painted, but when you see what's underneath the paint, it gives you a scary picture of their weld quality. ...remember, that is a sample size of one and only my opinion.
--------------------
Skuke
95 Carbonframes Tetra Pro
92 Bridgestone MB-1
90 Moser 51.151
|
vaxn8r
contributor
Reged: 12/19/03
Posts: 222
|
|
I own a CAAD7 but in response to your post, I've seen a CAAD4 cut in half and the welds are a perfect work of art. Pretty amazing how thin those big tubes are as well. CDale has perfected their weld process of ultralight tubes in a design that has proven itself in terms of fatigue resistance (is that a proper term? Anyway, they don't break except for abuse). They can do things, for example with their seat stays, that are not possible by anyone else. Their AL rear triangle is a near perfect balance of lightweight, comfort and efficiency unmatched by any bolt-on CF rear triangle. There's a reason they haven't ditched their AL rear triangle like so many other AL builders have.
I rode a 1988(?) CDale and hated them for years after that. Felt like riding a board. Rode a CAAD3 about 1997 and was impressed how much better they had become but still pretty stiff. My CAAD 7 is as comfortable as you would want a bike and yet plenty efficient. Cannondale has come a long way and you should not judge today's product on what they built in the 80's and early 90's. You may not like that they dominate in the US cycling market, you may hate their looks (I sure don't like them...they are a tool bike for me), but if one rode a 'Dale without any preconceived ideas I think almost anyone would be impressed.
|
Insightdriver
captain
Reged: 03/07/04
Posts: 472
|
|
I agree. The bike is all about fit anyway and it's not so brand-specific. I'm very happy with my Calfee. That said, I do not diss any production bike, especially those that started out from small companies that grew to be very large. Those who say such and such a companies product is crappy is ignoring that the market is brutal and you can't grow without making a good product. On the other hand, maybe some of you elitist people have such disdain toward the average person that you have your nose stuck in the air, thinking most folks are stupid compared to you. If the shoe fits, wear it.
|
skuke
captain
Reged: 12/22/03
Posts: 323
|
|
Quote:
vaxn8r wrote:
Cannondale has come a long way and you should not judge today's product on what they built in the 80's and early 90's.
You may not like that they dominate in the US cycling market,
you may hate their looks
I have not judged them today based on 15 year old bikes. As I said, I have no opinion about Cannondale. I've never ridden one and was only stating facts as I know them. I'll concede that my information is out dated and most likely obsolete.
They dominate the US market?? I thought that would be Trek. ...at least based on what I see around the SF bay area.
Actually, I rather like their smooth lines. I would prefer to see precise, accurate, weld beads.
--------------------
Skuke
95 Carbonframes Tetra Pro
92 Bridgestone MB-1
90 Moser 51.151
|
skuke
captain
Reged: 12/22/03
Posts: 323
|
|
Quote:
Insightdriver wrote:
I agree. The bike is all about fit anyway and it's not so brand-specific. I'm very happy with my Calfee. That said, I do not diss any production bike, especially those that started out from small companies that grew to be very large. Those who say such and such a companies product is crappy is ignoring that the market is brutal and you can't grow without making a good product. On the other hand, maybe some of you elitist people have such disdain toward the average person that you have your nose stuck in the air, thinking most folks are stupid compared to you. If the shoe fits, wear it.
Please correct me if I misunderstand and summarized your statements inaccurately: If a person shares a negative opinion regarding a product, they could be perceived to be elitist, superior, possesses a false belief that s/he is smarter than most people whom they despise and is ignorant of market share competition.
It's probably bordering on false logic, but would the converse of your hypothesis be true as well?
--------------------
Skuke
95 Carbonframes Tetra Pro
92 Bridgestone MB-1
90 Moser 51.151
|
Insightdriver
captain
Reged: 03/07/04
Posts: 472
|
|
I do not make judgments about negative opinions generally.
Some opinions are stated in such a way that they rub me the wrong way, though. I made a Google search: cannondale quality problems. I could see from the hits that most reviews and opinions are that Cannondale makes quality frames and bikes. Reviews by bicycle industry correspondents are overwhelmingly positive. I would think that if I were to search as I did and there were quality problems I would have found sites that stated such. I did not. When a person makes a blanket statement that a company makes junk and cites an example of a quality problem using hyperbole, that presents a credibilty problem.
Every company, no matter how high their quality, will produce a lemon occassionally. Bruce gave the impression that much of their products were of shoddy quality. That flies against the facts as I perceive them.
|
Bruce
contributor
Reged: 12/27/03
Posts: 133
Loc: North of NYC
|
|
I had a Cannondale MTB bike from the late 80's. It was way to stiff and rode like it. I got that bike because it was the only bike that had cantilever brakes mounted on the seat stays, rather than the U Brake mounted under the chain stays as was the stupid popular thing to do back then. Cannondale was a respected manufacturer then, but the bike was never a joy to ride.
I have since seen other problems the CDales over the years and have concluded that AL is NOT the material of choice of bike frames. Make it light, and it fails too often, build it up, and it becomes heavier than other materials. Their welds and frame alignment left lots to be desired as well. They may make a decent bike now, but they obviously see the writing on the wall and are now trying to position themselves as a bike company that is more than a one trick pony. They also failed miserably in the motorbike department, so you really got to wonder about the geniuses that are running the company into the ground. It was obvious to any idiot that carbon bikes were the way to go 5 years ago. Why wait till now to release a knock off of every other carbon bike out there?
My real problem with Cannondale has been their 20 year INSISTENCE that AL bikes are the way to go. Well now they have to eat major crow and admit that carbon is a far superior material to make a frame from. Their top two bikes are full carbon and a carbon AL (battery) hybrid. Compare this to a company like Trek who designs multiple designs in steel, AL, and carbon. They were also early on the carbon trend and now have a much better bike to show for it.
I also object to all the marketing hype that CDale spews out about carbon fiber bikes. Carbon bikes are much smoother simply because carbon absorbs shock at a lot better than metal, and not because of some marketing who ha blah blah blah junk. But I suppose that they have to defend their 20 year insistence on AL as the material of choice and say something to counter every other carbon bike maker that spews equally stupid marketing hype about how this chainstay design will transfer power better than just a plain straight tube.
I also have issues with other Cannondale products I have used over the years, and at this point I will not buy anything from Cannondale, as the product design is generally poor, and the price high. Who needs that combo?
I have also ridden with many CDale riders, and they all complain about a harsh ride, not in an overt way necessarily, but often in other contexts, ie. complains about hand fatigue and other issues that say to me the bike is too stiff. I'm all for stiffness, but it is not the overriding factor in frame design.
These are my opinions of course, based on my experience, your opinions and experiences are different from mine (gee, I wonder why?), and you are more then welcome to post them. Or you can be petty and attack the poster. Your choice.
PS. I don't check this board regularly, so I did not post sooner.
|
skuke
captain
Reged: 12/22/03
Posts: 323
|
|
Quote:
Insightdriver wrote:
I made a Google search: cannondale quality problems. I could see from the hits that most reviews and opinions are that Cannondale makes quality frames and bikes. Reviews by bicycle industry correspondents are overwhelmingly positive. I would think that if I were to search as I did and there were quality problems I would have found sites that stated such. I did not.
Google is great!! I've been using it since their introduction in the late 90s! However, a problem may be that there were not very many online reviews or opinions available from the late 80s and early 90s. So unless somebody scanned in or transcribed a review, all the search engines in the world won't find it.
Another thing is that rarely will you ever find one of the major bicycle magazines totally dissing a bike. They may have a short, innocuous statement presented in a negative manner regarding one aspect of a bike. Maybe I'm a bit naive in such matters, but I believe even the honorable and trusted magazines still gets most of it's revenue from advertising and it's not in the magazines best interest to post too many negative articles. If they did, they'd soon run out of sponsors.
Most negative feedbacks will come from forums and usenet newsgroups. ...I realize that more people will complain about a bad product rather than praise a good product (except for this forum!) so the ratios are a bit skewed, but real world data and opinions are there. Even though Google bought DejaNews a few years ago, I don't think the database goes back to the late 80s in most instances.
While Cannondale may make a great product today, there are three instances in this thread that tell of poor quality from a previous era. While that may not be pertinent today, there is also nobody defending C'Dales from that era either.
As I've said before, I may totally disagree with what you say, but I'll defend your right to say it. With that in mind, I do agree with Bruce that there is no need to attack posters. One of the reasons I frequent this forum, besides being a Tetra owner, is that the posters here generally treat each other with more respect. Check out some of the usenet groups ...but wear your Nomex.
FWIW, I was offered a job at Cannondale in the late 80s. They were in need of an R&D machinist, preferably a bike enthusiest and I fit the bill! I already had an opinion about their welds and frames at the time but ultimately, I declined because it meant moving and I didn't want to do that. I don't believe my opinion regarding their frames factored into my decision in the least.
--------------------
Skuke
95 Carbonframes Tetra Pro
92 Bridgestone MB-1
90 Moser 51.151
|
vaxn8r
contributor
Reged: 12/19/03
Posts: 222
|
|
Bruce, you want a revelation in MTB? Try a Cannondale Prophet. I rode one two weeks ago and it was the most fun I've ever had on a mountain bike. It will get over, down, around anything you have the nerve to try. It's a total bail-out bike as you'll try stuff you never thought possible before. That's where I don't get your logic. You don't like the Synapse because your 1987 MTB was too stiff? If you could tell that a CDale MTB frame was stiffer than say a steel Specialized Stumpjumper, even though the frame accounts for less than 1% of comfort level assuming a hard tail and fork....I mean put 1 lb less pressure in those fat knobbies and it would be a wash.
Also, the Synapse is NOT CDale's top bike. They designed it for old guys, less flexible guys and for people who want more comfort with a slightly flexier frame and a big head tube for upright riding. CDAle is not going away from AL. And so what if they offer CF now, after all these years? Let's see who else is on the CF band wagon in just the last 3 years...Serotta, Seven, Merlin, Landshark, Eddy Merkx, Tommassini, Pinarello...overall, many of the industry leaders. I guess your ready to blast all of them too?
Cannondale's prices are high? What are you talking about? You can get a CAAd8 with full DA10, complete bike for $2600. You simply can not beat Cannondale on bike for the buck. That is a fact. If you have other information please share it.
The problem I have with your posts is your very strongly negative opinions are not based on relevant fact. You're entitled to your opinion, but the infomation you have on CDale is either vastly outdated and/or plain false. Sorry but true.
Want to talk about Calfees now? Peace.
|
Bruce
contributor
Reged: 12/27/03
Posts: 133
Loc: North of NYC
|
|
I don't think I said I did not like the Synapse. I simply called Cannondale a stupid company for not getting into the carbon bike business sooner. Their ill fated diversion in the motorcycles is more proof that stark raving lunatics were running the company. Now apparently under new management, they get the great idea to do a carbon bike. Duh, what took you so long? Like I said, a bunch of idiots that I no longer patronize.
Cannondale builds cheap bikes for sure, but you end up with a too stiff frame, even by your own admission. I see a lot of first time riders on Cannondale, but they almost always choose another bike when they upgrade. Also, I don't see a lot of long distance cyclists on Cannondales. They are just too stiff to ride on anything over 60 miles. This is not just Cannondale, but all oversized AL bikes. They pound your body and who needs that. A friend of mine, a much stronger rider than I, has both a AL bike and a carbon bike. One guess as to which bike he will take on the double century.
I also think cyclists tend to place too much emphasis on stiffness, when the bike only needs to be as stiff as the rider needs, and not stiffer just for the sake of stiffness. For me, and I think this applies to all riders, if a bike does not flex when you are standing climbing the steepest grade you can manage or have occasion to do (like 20% in my area), and you can't detect extra chainring rub from a sitting position on a flat road, then the bike is stiff enough. The way I do this test is to trim the front D is that is just makes the tiniest rubbing noise. Then climb a steep hill where you have to stand and are moving about 2 mph up it, and if you don't hear a difference in chain ring rub, then your bike is stiff enough.
My Dragonfly passes this test. My over built and heavy steel touring frame also passes this test. A Pinarello Price with a rear carbon seatstay does not, nor does a Colnogo Dream. I have not tried it with a Cannondale.
As for Calfees, my Dragonfly has a much nice ride than my touring bike. Steel is nice, but heavy and not as good as shock absorption as carbon. Al may be stiff and light, but comfort is not an attribute you associate with AL.
If you want a frame you don't have to compromise on, get carbon, all other materials lack in one or more areas. Cannondale is just now figuring this out after 20+ years.
|
Previous
Thread Index
Next
Threaded
Cannondale is coming over to the Dark Side!
Edit
Reply
Quote
Re: Cannondale is coming over to the Dark Side!
[Re: