Cannondale SuperX 2017 Photos Release

Especially for light weight issues concerning cyclocross / touring bikes & parts.

Moderator: Moderator Team

lwrncc
Posts: 61
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2011 4:47 pm

by lwrncc

Several online retailers have the 2017 SuperX photos out. Not renderings.

Here you go:

Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Last edited by lwrncc on Wed Jun 22, 2016 2:48 pm, edited 2 times in total.
"It doesn't get easier, you just go faster"

http://bb2stem.blogspot.com.au/

by Weenie


oldmac
Posts: 27
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2016 9:49 am

by oldmac

I like the painting of the first one.

jeffy
Posts: 1260
Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2014 11:51 pm

by jeffy

shimano have 160mm and sram gets 140mm??

odd as both companies recommend the other. have no experience of sram, but 140mm is plenty for shimano hydraulic.

headwind816
Posts: 335
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2012 4:43 pm

by headwind816

Not sure what I think of the paint schemes - will hold judgment until I see them in person - but must say the geometry change is interesting and a drastic departure from the past.

User avatar
Calnago
Posts: 6217
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 9:14 pm

by Calnago

Yes. That geo chart contains some pretty radical changes. I can see the need for longer chainstays to help with chainline if they're using discs, but the front end geo needs some 'splainin. 71 degree headtube angle on a large frame. 55mm rake. Wheelbases that are several centimeters longer than what I would expect. Trail numbers all over 6cm. I would guess that would all add up to a very slow handling bicycle, albeit stable in a straight line. In fact it's so different I'm wondering if it's accurate?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Colnago C64 - The Naked Build; Colnago C60 - PR99; Trek Koppenberg - Where Emonda and Domane Meet;
Unlinked Builds (searchable): Colnago C59 - 5 Years Later; Trek Emonda SL Campagnolo SR; Special Colnago EPQ

User avatar
doubleD
Posts: 320
Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2006 8:31 pm
Location: CT

by doubleD

Hi Calnago, I saw that you asked for some 'splainin! I'm David and I worked with a team of people from Cannondale's Freiburg, Germany and US office in Connecticut on this bike.

It will be a few more days before full info is out on the bike above, but you are right, this bike does have some changes in geo. All changes are targeted in making the bike feel both more stable and to offer more traction to the rider. Coming out of the FSi project, we had seriously positive feedback that with a slacker HT angle and longer fork offset the bike could feel stable on steep downhills, but still handle quickly at slow speed. The trail figure found on most sizes of the new SuperX is 62mm. Several other companies are producing cyclocross bikes with slacker HT angles (between 71-71.5) but still using shorter fork offsets, around 45-47mm. This would lead to much longer trail measurements, and slower slow speed handling. We tested several geometry mules with varying offset and several HT angles before we arrived at the 71 degree/55mm offset combination. It gives stability, but still handles quickly at slow speed. We call this OutFront geometry.

Chainstay length is about 8mm shorter than the previous bike, from 430mm to 422mm. This puts more of the riders weight right underneath the rear wheel helping traction in slippery situations. In addition, with growing the front center slightly (slacker HT angle and longer offset) the shorter chainstay helps keep wheelbase in check!

I've been on this geo for the past two season here in New England. The bike is a pleasure to ride in the slippery stuff, and on the steeper features (Northampton) was for sure more confident. Hope you can get out and try one soon!

User avatar
Calnago
Posts: 6217
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 9:14 pm

by Calnago

Thank you @doubleD. So that geo chart is accurate then. Well, proof is in the riding I suppose, but I do have a custom road bike with a trail of over 6cm along with a slacker headtube (for the frame size) and I can say I didn't really care for it at all. It resulted in a lot of "wheel flop" while climbing at slow speeds and with the front end way out its hard to get it feeling really planted in a downhill corner. You get a feeling it wants to wash out. As for wheelbase, my C59 (61 traditional) has a wheelbase of 1015mm. My Trek 60cm Emonda SL has a wheelbase of 1001mm. Your 61 Supersix (same top tube length and slightly steeper seattube angle) has a wheelbase of a whopping 1061mm! That's a full 6cm longer than the Trek and almost 5cm longer than the C59. Both the Trek and the C59 have superb handling characteristics in my opinion. I will indeed look forward to trying one of these out just to feel the difference if nothing else. Thanks for the reply.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Colnago C64 - The Naked Build; Colnago C60 - PR99; Trek Koppenberg - Where Emonda and Domane Meet;
Unlinked Builds (searchable): Colnago C59 - 5 Years Later; Trek Emonda SL Campagnolo SR; Special Colnago EPQ

User avatar
hmai18
Posts: 652
Joined: Mon May 15, 2006 12:19 am
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada.

by hmai18

@DoubleD: Was the bike designed to clear more than a 33mm tire?

Lots of us privateer racers out there who don't need to adhere to UCI rules and would appreciate the extra volume.

User avatar
Calnago
Posts: 6217
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 9:14 pm

by Calnago

Super whoops! Revisiting this thread and just realized we're talking SuperX here, not SuperSix. Now the geometry makes much more sense to me. I don't know why but I was thinking Supersix, not SuperX.
My mistake. Big time. Ignore my previous posts in this thread. They are completely irrelevant as I was in Road geometry mode. Apologies.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Colnago C64 - The Naked Build; Colnago C60 - PR99; Trek Koppenberg - Where Emonda and Domane Meet;
Unlinked Builds (searchable): Colnago C59 - 5 Years Later; Trek Emonda SL Campagnolo SR; Special Colnago EPQ

wheelzqc
Posts: 249
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 6:51 pm

by wheelzqc

Any ideas if the geo and frame changes for the CAADX ? It looks like it.

User avatar
doubleD
Posts: 320
Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2006 8:31 pm
Location: CT

by doubleD

@wheelzqc the geo also applies to CAADX for model year 2017

@Calnago no worries! man I would have been in trouble if that was SuperSix geo... :beerchug: Hope you can get out to ride a SuperX

@Hmai18 I appreciate tire volume for sure. We left room for really big tires on this bike. With 33c race tire there is about 11mm on either side of the frame. This leave alot of room for inevitable mud buildup, Stephen Hyde raced end of last season in Belgium on it and noticed in a race where riders were pitting on half laps, he could get a full lap.

For us privateers 35 - 40 mm tire was also designed to fit. We throw WTB nanos in and go ride some singletrack. Leaving room for 40mm rubber makes this thing versatile, also good for gravel race if your bike is doing dual duty.

wheelzqc
Posts: 249
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 6:51 pm

by wheelzqc

Thanks for the info. Much appreciated. My CAADx currently squeezes 40mm at the back(clement mso). I like the new geo as I was a bit stuck between the 48 and 52 for the SuperX. The new 51 looks spot on.

BSUdude
Posts: 15
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2012 1:26 pm

by BSUdude

Graphically, I'm just glad the branding was kept in line this year...last year's bikes were hideous save for the SuperX Himod.

HeadsetAdjustment
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2016 4:35 pm

by HeadsetAdjustment

@doubleD, thanks so much this is great information! Question regarding the geometry and sizing: I currently race a 2014 SuperSix Evo Hi-Mod in a 56cm (stock length stem) and am wondering what size I would be in this new geo? Before the redesign I was thinking I'd be a 54cm on the SuperX but now I'm thinking 56?

by Weenie


User avatar
doubleD
Posts: 320
Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2006 8:31 pm
Location: CT

by doubleD

@HeadsetAdjustment looking at stack and reach I would recommend a 56cm with a 1cm shorter stem. I also ride a 56cm evo and the 56cm SuperX fits me very well. I was in between sizes on the previous SuperX. Across all sizes the goal was to fit true to road sizing, rather that the pervious "Size down for cyclocross" model.

@Wheelzqc The goal was to fill some of those size gaps, glad the new 51cm works well for you!

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post