Cannondale TOPSTONE 2019 is released

[oldmac]

I have had my "105" topstone (size: L) for almost a week.

Weight:
Stock weight was 10.4kg (that is with tubes, without pedals or cages).
With A600 pedals, Garmin mount, 2 cages 10.7

Note that mine arrived with ultegra STI and brakes. According to my LBS, C'dale did not receive enough 7000 parts and just upgraded - which supposedly happened previously with new models.

Ride:
Planted, balanced, stable.
Springy enough for gravel.
Very similar to a Synapse with better tracking.

Upgrades:
Wheels and crankset are the obvious choices.
Awaiting carbon wheelset that will save >800 gr.
Saddle and post will be upgraded that will reduce weight by 300 gr.
9 kg should be easy.

You are the man！Congratulations!

[triteacher]

Super! That's the kind of info I had been waiting for:-)
Sounds like a good deal receiving the bike with Ultegra STIs and brakes. Nice.

How about posting some photos?

[talisman51]

So it seems Cdale doesnt post their Topstone stem, hbar, crank... lengths online in their frame size specific geo specs.. Anybody know em? thks

[talisman51]

Picked up a large 105 model today. All the early builds are ultegra shifters and brakes as mentioned earlier. The r7000 shifting is amazing. Cranks are 172.5, stem is 100mm and bars are I believe 40cm. I have r5800 105 on my road bike which is clunky in comparison. The shop weighed it at 24 lbs Time to get off the tarmac once and awhile.

[Curious George]

This was on my short list. But due to a mid-december arrival date here in Aussie, and limited numbers I have gone with a Trek Checkpoint instead.
I think Cannondale may have underestimated how popular this bike is going to be...

[triteacher]

For those of you interested...
German website bikesteelborrow.com have put up a set of photos of the 105. Though defintely lacking in aesthetics (What the heck had they been smoking when choosing THIS background?!? ) the pictures reveal a ton more detail than the few promotional photos you could find online so far. Check‘em out:
http://www.bikesteelborrow.com/road-cro ... -105-kaj9f

Don‘t worry - the link is NOT taking you to the Synapse 105.

[Wolfshohl]

Update:

Running now carbon wheels 650b w 48mm tires.
Plenty of space around them, minimum of 8mm all around front and back.
With that, the new WTB nobby road tires should be fine as well.

[acroft95]

Update:

Running now carbon wheels 650b w 48mm tires.
Plenty of space around them, minimum of 8mm all around front and back.
With that, the new WTB nobby road tires should be fine as well.

Have Cannondale specifically said it will work with 650b? This is key for the versatility for me.

[DamonRinard]

Hi acroft95,

As Wolfshohl wrote, the Topstone certainly works with 650B.

If all you do is change tire diameter (not tire width), 650B has 19 mm smaller radius, which means 19 mm lower BB. This is the main risk, so choose a wider 650 tire to keep the BB height reasonable.

Handling could change a little, since trail also decreases, but even in the above case of changing only the diameter, it goes from 65 to 59 mm, still a nice feeling ride. A slightly wider tire also makes this change smaller.

I say go for it!

Cheers,
Damon

[Dubairoadster]

Ordered a Topstone Apex (size s) today. 105 def more vfm but wanted to have the blue color! Upgrades to be done as soon as arrived: 3t superghiaia bar, cdale save carbon post, lighter saddle w/carbon rails and force 11-36 cassette. Have a pair of enves that fit the Topstone, so can shave off significant weight - Cant wait!

[acroft95]

Hi acroft95,

As Wolfshohl wrote, the Topstone certainly works with 650B.

If all you do is change tire diameter (not tire width), 650B has 19 mm smaller radius, which means 19 mm lower BB. This is the main risk, so choose a wider 650 tire to keep the BB height reasonable.

Handling could change a little, since trail also decreases, but even in the above case of changing only the diameter, it goes from 65 to 59 mm, still a nice feeling ride. A slightly wider tire also makes this change smaller.

I say go for it!

Cheers,
Damon

Thanks for the info. Ill almost certainly pick up an Apex model when they arrive down under!

[TheKaiser]

As Wolfshohl wrote, the Topstone certainly works with 650B.

If all you do is change tire diameter (not tire width), 650B has 19 mm smaller radius, which means 19 mm lower BB. This is the main risk, so choose a wider 650 tire to keep the BB height reasonable.

Handling could change a little, since trail also decreases, but even in the above case of changing only the diameter, it goes from 65 to 59 mm, still a nice feeling ride. A slightly wider tire also makes this change smaller.

Hi Damon, I have a quick question for you also regarding Topstone geometry. I'd normally ride a 56 or 58 in the CAAD12. I'm planning on getting a Topstone, and was going to go for a Large, as the reach for the large sits right between the 56-58 CAAD12 (closer to 56, in fact). Then I noticed the Horizontal Top Tube figures for the L Topstone actually come in 4mm longer than a 58 CAAD12, which was a little puzzling. The Reach figure makes the bike seem quite a bit smaller than the Top Tube figure does. Seat tube angle only varies .1 degree between the Topstone and 58 CAAD12 (steeper on the CAAD), so I am having trouble seeing how that could account for what seems to be a 9mm difference in the relationship between Reach and HTT figures between the 58 CAAD and Topstone. Is there some sort of typo/miscalculation in the geometry table, or am I missing some nuance of the interplay.

I also tried looking at the figures on the 60cm CAAD 12, as the seat tube on that bike is slacker than the Topstone, and the Reach/TT relationship there seemed a little odd too. Despite the 60cm CAAD being .2 degrees slacker, reach/TT grow almost in lockstep (within 1mm), so that suggests to me that seat tube angle doesn't account for all of the discrepancy I'm seeing on the 58 CAAD comparison above. Any insight into what is going on here and which of those figures would be the truest indicator of the fit? Normally I prefer to go by Stack/Reach as it really distills things down to the key elements, and I figure everything else can usually be adjusted with seatpost/stem tweaks, but I find sometimes Stack/Reach can be miscalculated by manufacturers leading to erroneous assumptions.

[DamonRinard]

Hi TheKaiser,

You're using stack and reach correctly, and you're right to use top tube (perhaps modified by seat tube angle) as a check. There's no typo; what you're noticing is simply the effect of comparing two models whose stack and reach points lie on different lines.

The CAAD12 fits like a Race bike, while Topstone fits more like an Endurance bike. The main difference is a higher stack, as if the endurance bike's fit is built from the race bike's by adding one or two more stem spacers. That moves the stem higher (higher stack), but also moves it back (less reach), since spacers assemble along the fork, which is inclined at the head angle, not purely vertically. So reach is also affected. That's why the raw numbers don't seem to make sense.

I made this chart comparing the models and sizes you mentioned. When plotted in 2D it's easier to see.


The chart shows the Topstone in size L is roughly similar to a CAAD12 in size 58, but with roughly 1 or 2 cm more spacers. Starting from the CAAD12 58, add virtual spacers by following the gray "73 degree" fork line up to the Topstone line. As the fork line continues up to reach the Topstone's 61cm stack, you can see the 4mm longer top tube in the gap.

So for example, coming from a 58 CAAD12, a Large Topstone could be about right if, like many, you also plan to raise your bars a bit. The 4mm longer top tube could be cancelled with maybe a 10mm shorter stem, for a net higher and shorter bar position on the gravel bike. If that's what you're after. If you're after something else, then take a look at the options you can imagine from the chart. For another example, a size M Topstone could fit like a 56 CAAD12 with about one extra spacer, and maybe a little shorter top tube (might be a good bar position for a gravel bike, or could be cancelled with a longer stem). You get the idea.

Cheers,
Damon

[MountainAddict]

Anyone have any recommendations for bikes that could be a good alternative to the Topstone with the same (or VERY similar specs and price)?

I can't get a Topstone 105 in Size XL, local dealer says they're unavailable until April 2019 and none of the other delaers they normally "trade" inventory with have one. I've emailed a couple bike stores that show Topstone 105 in Size XL available on their websites and hoping I can get one of them to ship the bike to me (if their websites are accurate).

I've considered the Fuji Jari 1.1 and Trek Checkpoint ALR5, but both are $350+ more than the Topstone and I'm not crazy about either paint job. Any other options out there? The Canyon Grail AL was another option, but on the US Website it's "Coming Soon" so who knows how long it'll be until they're actually in stock - plus, they cost alitttle more than the Topstone + Shipping.

[TheKaiser]

Hi TheKaiser,

You're using stack and reach correctly, and you're right to use top tube (perhaps modified by seat tube angle) as a check. There's no typo; what you're noticing is simply the effect of comparing two models whose stack and reach points lie on different lines.

The CAAD12 fits like a Race bike, while Topstone fits more like an Endurance bike. The main difference is a higher stack, as if the endurance bike's fit is built from the race bike's by adding one or two more stem spacers. That moves the stem higher (higher stack), but also moves it back (less reach), since spacers assemble along the fork, which is inclined at the head angle, not purely vertically. So reach is also affected. That's why the raw numbers don't seem to make sense.

I made this chart comparing the models and sizes you mentioned. When plotted in 2D it's easier to see.


The chart shows the Topstone in size L is roughly similar to a CAAD12 in size 58, but with roughly 1 or 2 cm more spacers. Starting from the CAAD12 58, add virtual spacers by following the gray "73 degree" fork line up to the Topstone line. As the fork line continues up to reach the Topstone's 61cm stack, you can see the 4mm longer top tube in the gap.

So for example, coming from a 58 CAAD12, a Large Topstone could be about right if, like many, you also plan to raise your bars a bit. The 4mm longer top tube could be cancelled with maybe a 10mm shorter stem, for a net higher and shorter bar position on the gravel bike. If that's what you're after. If you're after something else, then take a look at the options you can imagine from the chart. For another example, a size M Topstone could fit like a 56 CAAD12 with about one extra spacer, and maybe a little shorter top tube (might be a good bar position for a gravel bike, or could be cancelled with a longer stem). You get the idea.

Cheers,
Damon

Wow, thank you for the detailed reply! That chart is really helping me to wrap my head around how the HTT and Reach can be decoupled, even with an more or less equivalent ST angle. You've inspired me man, I'm going to take a Large Topstone 105 on a test cruise tomorrow. As far as you know, will the chainstay on the bike present any clearance problems if I wanted to swap out to a 34/50 compact double Shimano crank? I know sometimes ensuring clearance for big tires can make it difficult to clear larger rings. Thanks again!