Cannondale SuperSix vs Canyon Ultimate vs Giant TCR vs Trek Emonda vs Cervelo R5 vs Focus Izalco vs...

[zappafile123]

.....
Izalco Max (objectively a good bike, but poorly balanced compared to the rest)

hmmm, what exactly do you mean with "poorly balanced"?

I use a 2012 SS Evo HM as a commuter. It does everything well, but boy its just go no character as a bike. The Tarmac SL6 is on another level. I've briefly ridden the updated dale, and its largely similar with some very mild improvement in stiffness, but its basically the same, marginally improved ride from memory.

i think thats a question of personal preference.

I think you're right. There is definitely a ownership bias going on. But honestly, direct comparison between the 2012 Evo HM and the 2019 SW SL6, the latter is much more responsive, feels stiffer, does a bit job of dulling out big bumps, and feels a lot faster. Simply it feels like a superior frame on all fronts. This is all subjective right - Im sure if we timed my rides with the same setup, there would be a handful of seconds between the two rigs.

Regarding the poor balance of the Max, I found it to be just a brutal ride. I'd nice and stiff, handles well, does everything you want it to just like the other frames, but after 2 hours, you feel like you've taken a beating. So its unbalanced in the sense that there are no concessions to comfort unlike the other frames in the list.

[zappafile123]

I have heard the 02 is very stiff. I have also heard that there are layup similarities with the Izalco Max, i.e. one insider espoused that they sort of the same frame - that could be bullshit.

Absolute nonsense.

Hahah, I did say it could be bullshit. Another way of saying the same thing is that the frames shared a designer or whatever... but what does that really mean... its a waste of typed space most likely.

[ND4SPD]

Thank you all for your contribution here, it is interesting discussion

My only suggestion is to pay close attention to the geometry.

To quote two of those, the Orca size 55 has a stack of 584, reach 387. The TCR size M (which would be roughly the equivalent) has a stack of 545, reach 383. So you're looking at two bikes with a 4 cm difference in stack, which is by no means small. Figure out your fit first, I'd say..

You want a bike that is LIGHT and COMFORTABLE.

LIGHT: I would guess all of those frames will be within 100-200gr of each other. The lightest bike will be the one you can get with the best and lightest components. So probably Canyon or Giant may come with a better spec for the same money.

COMFORTABLE: here the situation gets intricated, as comfort comes from a wide array of factors, main ones being tires, wheels, saddle, seatpost, and so on. All the bikes you mentioned will be fairly comfortable in their own right - there may be differences but nothing outrageous, as you're not comparing a full-on aero bike with 23mm tires versus a plush endurance bike on 28mm tires.

Aerodynamics weren't mentioned as a criterion, but I will say that some of the bikes you mention (notably TCR, Emonda, Supersix..) are not really that much optimised for aerodynamics, which means especially on flats you may be looking at a small wattage penalty versus some of the others.

I have recently ordered a SL6, but it's not as traditional-looking as you would like probably. Among those you mentioned, I'd consider the R5.

I agree, every one of them have different geometry... BTW you should compare Orbea Orca size 55 with Giant TCR size ML...

I know that lighter usually means stiffer/harsher ride...

I think Giant would be the lightest and the cheapest... I know the frames are superbly build (Giant manufacture frames for other bike "manufacturers"), I know it rides superbly... I have also looked at Merida Scultura, but... I know both names are well known in the bike world, but I would like something a litte more exotic if I can

I think 28mm should be comfortable, and with tubeless setup even more... I'm 50/50 for tubeless, I don't like monthly adding sealant in the tyres, and reassembling them when sealant dryes and clogs the valves... When they make sealant that lasts longer (at least one year), I will be convinced that tubeless are the way to go...

I know this is wheight-weenies, but a few grams here and there is not so important for me, neither is the aero... There are certanly some gains on higher speeds, but I'm not a pro, and for me personally, it's not that important...

You are correct for SL6, I'm looking at traditional looking frame... If Sl6 was in the game, there would also be BMC Teammachine, Willier Cento, and other bikes...

So the Tarmac SL6 should be better here, did it have a different wheelset?

And in the latest Tour mag. test the Canyon Aeroad with the "normal" (but designed for flex) Carbon seatpost was as comfortable as the Madone with IsoSpeed...

Like I said, I'm looking for a traditional looking frame...

Aeroad vs Madone and comfort, that's hard to believe, maybe personal opinion of the rider/tester?

You may add Time Alpe d'Huez to the list.

Besides it's too much money, sorry, but I don't like the look of that triangle where seat-post, seat-tube and top-tube joins...

I think you're right. There is definitely a ownership bias going on. But honestly, direct comparison between the 2012 Evo HM and the 2019 SW SL6, the latter is much more responsive, feels stiffer, does a bit job of dulling out big bumps, and feels a lot faster. Simply it feels like a superior frame on all fronts. This is all subjective right - Im sure if we timed my rides with the same setup, there would be a handful of seconds between the two rigs.

Have you tried newer EVO HM?

[zappafile123]

Thank you all for your contribution here, it is interesting discussion

Have you tried newer EVO HM?

I have ridden it briefly - see my previous comments on this thread. It is slightly better, but not night and day different in its ride quality. That view is commensurate with published reviews. Overall the Evo is a very well balanced ride - pretty comfy, pretty stiff, quite light, handles well. I just find riding along it doesn't have that 'alive' feeling, that you're hurtling along, that you're faster than you actually are. It works and thats it. It doesnt inspire. Its plain old 'good'. Its not special, but at the same time, it is one of the better framesets on the market.

[reedplayer]

Regarding the poor balance of the Max, I found it to be just a brutal ride. I'd nice and stiff, handles well, does everything you want it to just like the other frames, but after 2 hours, you feel like you've taken a beating. So its unbalanced in the sense that there are no concessions to comfort unlike the other frames in the list.

ah, thats interesting-because for me, the izalco max is choice no1 for long rides in the mountain area, or marathons like the "ötztaler radmarathon" or "maratona dolomiti"! i although rode cd super six evo hm, ridley helium, scott addict hmx. i found all of those bikes very similar concerning stiffness and so called "ride quality".

i voted for the izalco due to handling and aesthetics (both individual, as the op, i prefer traditional appearance)), but, as said, differences in "ride quality" were imo not worth mentioning, maybe i am not sensitive enough.


@op: i would although add the ridley helium slx to the list if geometry fits, they only offer 5 sizes.

[reedplayer]

double post

[tarmackev]

TCR (+1 race bike, -1 street cred).

TCR Street cred? Never heard that one, it’s a great bike but it’s as average as they come. It’s the Ford Focus of the road bike world.
Not saying it’s bad it’s just very common.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[robeambro]

I know this is wheight-weenies, but a few grams here and there is not so important for me, neither is the aero... There are certanly some gains on higher speeds, but I'm not a pro, and for me personally, it's not that important...

Double check tire clearance, and if you can run 25 or even 28mm tires, then none of the bikes you listed will be uncomfortable.
Once you've done that, honestly, if this is how you feel about weight and aero, ALL of those bikes will do just fine*, and you should speak the one you like the looks of the most. Which I presume will be the SS Evo.



*assuming you will fit on all of them fine

[crlincoln]

I'm looking at similar list of bikes, although edging towards an Argon 18 Gallium at the moment, for something a bit different...

[asiantrick]

Regarding the poor balance of the Max, I found it to be just a brutal ride. I'd nice and stiff, handles well, does everything you want it to just like the other frames, but after 2 hours, you feel like you've taken a beating. So its unbalanced in the sense that there are no concessions to comfort unlike the other frames in the list.

ah, thats interesting-because for me, the izalco max is choice no1 for long rides in the mountain area, or marathons like the "ötztaler radmarathon" or "maratona dolomiti"! i although rode cd super six evo hm, ridley helium, scott addict hmx. i found all of those bikes very similar concerning stiffness and so called "ride quality".

i voted for the izalco due to handling and aesthetics (both individual, as the op, i prefer traditional appearance)), but, as said, differences in "ride quality" were imo not worth mentioning, maybe i am not sensitive enough.


@op: i would although add the ridley helium slx to the list if geometry fits, they only offer 5 sizes.

I owned an Izalco Max and currently riding the Addict Sl and Specialissima. Love the Izalco but that bike felt like riding on a bogo stick comparred to the Addict and Specialissima. My body just couldn't take the beating after 50miles or so. Specialissima might be the most comfortable and well balanced out of the 3.

[Karvalo]

Worth reminding everyone that the new Izalco Max is an entirely different bike to the one that's been around for the last decade or so. Any comments on ride quality, handling or responsiveness based on experience with a 2018 or previous bike are irrelevant if the OP is looking at the 2019 version.

[Ringo]

If you are realistic you go for TCR, it’s a no brainer.
If you are like me.. you go for Time Alpe d’Huez..!
I don’t know why, but I hate factor.

[reedplayer]

I owned an Izalco Max and currently riding the Addict Sl and Specialissima. Love the Izalco but that bike felt like riding on a bogo stick comparred to the Addict and Specialissima. My body just couldn't take the beating after 50miles or so. Specialissima might be the most comfortable and well balanced out of the 3.

as said, my impression, and i am not alone, is totally different. in terms of so called "ride quality", you permanently read completely contrary assessments concerning the same product/frame. so i dont take this too serious, i think this is very subjective, no "exact science".

imo comfort comes from choice of the right saddle, flexible seatpost (long excerpt on sloping frames like the ridley helium or tarmac sl6 o.c. helps a little bit, if you like it), wheelset....but last from the frame.

[Lewn777]

Cannondale SuperSix vs Canyon Ultimate vs Giant TCR vs Trek Emonda vs Cervelo R5 vs Focus Izalco vs...

Holy hell, you'd need to be a cycling journo to have ridden all those!
My opnion is weak as I haven't ridden all those bikes but IMHO would opt for the Emonda or SuperSix.
Ridden:I really like the Emonda for climbing and it's good on descents. Fuji SL is a nice too framset too and worth considering.
Reputation: I rented a CAAD12 and loved it so a Supersix would obviously be on my list, and the TCR and Canyon get rave reviews as well. Rented two S-Works SL5s, felt a bit dead and stiff but very capable, SL6 could be much better. I rented a Cervelo R3 and I didn't really get on with the handling on corners and at high speeds, but the R5 could also be better.

[TobinHatesYou]

Cannondale SuperSix vs Canyon Ultimate vs Giant TCR vs Trek Emonda vs Cervelo R5 vs Focus Izalco vs...

Holy hell, you'd need to be a cycling journo to have ridden all those!
My opnion is weak as I haven't ridden all those bikes but IMHO would opt for the Emonda or SuperSix.
Ridden:I really like the Emonda for climbing and it's good on descents. Fuji SL is a nice too framset too and worth considering.
Reputation: I rented a CAAD12 and loved it so a Supersix would obviously be on my list, and the TCR and Canyon get rave reviews as well. Rented two S-Works SL5s, felt a bit dead and stiff but very capable, SL6 could be much better. I rented a Cervelo R3 and I didn't really get on with the handling on corners and at high speeds, but the R5 could also be better.

Riding all of those is as simple as having local shops that stock them...minus the Canyon of course. It’s odd that you are incredulous over the prospect of trying six bikes, yet moments later rattle off the names of five models you’ve ridden.