Are We Getting A New Cannondale Supersix?

Discuss light weight issues concerning road bikes & parts.
User avatar
Maximilian
Posts: 323
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2011 8:09 pm
Location: Warwickshire

by Maximilian

tarmackev wrote:
Thu Jun 27, 2019 3:05 pm
SRAM red 11 speed mechanical rim brake HM and I’d buy.
I wish SRAM would still make a light mechanical groupset for us weightweenies.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'd prefer mechanical (Record 12) but I hate the mechanical cable routing so would have to go electronic to avoid that. I refuse eTap AXS due to my wheels not being compatible (Corima Viva S & Mavic Cosmic Carbone 80)...

oldmac
Posts: 55
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2016 9:49 am

by oldmac

The geometry is more aggressive, so sad to see that. I can't find my size.

by Weenie


User avatar
Calnago
Posts: 8608
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 9:14 pm

by Calnago

Physics schmysics.... I’ll never be throwin’ a leg over something that’s butt ugly.
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
Maximilian
Posts: 323
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2011 8:09 pm
Location: Warwickshire

by Maximilian

oldmac wrote:
Thu Jun 27, 2019 3:12 pm
The geometry is more aggressive, so sad to see that. I can't find my size.
No it isn't. In a 58cm frame -->

SuperSix Evo Gen 3: Stack = 594mm. Reach = 395mm
SSE Gen 2: Stack = 584mm. Reach = 399mm
SSE Gen 1: Stack = 577mm. Reach = 399mm
CAAD9: Stack = 579mm. Reach = 399mm

Gen 1 SSE is almost identical to the CAAD9. The later two generations of the SSE have got taller and in the latest 3rd gen shorter in reach!

For the new one to fit me I'd need it slammed with a -17 110mm stem . At the moment my CAAD9 is slammed (on a #slamthatstem bearing cover) with a -6 stem (100mm)

Verbal
Posts: 73
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2014 12:02 pm

by Verbal

No HM version for rim brakes. That’s all Folk.
Happy to have the latest Ss6 HM with rim brakes.

Hexsense
Posts: 1165
Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2015 12:41 am

by Hexsense

That geometry... Wow!

74mm drop on most sizes except some few large sizes where people actually need long cranks.

55mm fork rake+slack head tube angle all the way to size 54. Then switch to 45mm fork rake and steep head tube angle for larger half of available sizes. It keep trail value very constant, solving issues of smaller sizes and also make size scaling of stack and reach consistent.

Bold move and i really like that.
Last edited by Hexsense on Thu Jun 27, 2019 3:40 pm, edited 2 times in total.

oldmac
Posts: 55
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2016 9:49 am

by oldmac

Maximilian wrote:
Thu Jun 27, 2019 3:26 pm
oldmac wrote:
Thu Jun 27, 2019 3:12 pm
The geometry is more aggressive, so sad to see that. I can't find my size.
No it isn't. In a 58cm frame -->

SuperSix Evo Gen 3: Stack = 594mm. Reach = 395mm
SSE Gen 2: Stack = 584mm. Reach = 399mm
SSE Gen 1: Stack = 577mm. Reach = 399mm
CAAD9: Stack = 579mm. Reach = 399mm

Gen 1 SSE is almost identical to the CAAD9. The later two generations of the SSE have got taller and in the latest 3rd gen shorter in reach!

For the new one to fit me I'd need it slammed with a -17 110mm stem . At the moment my CAAD9 is slammed (on a #slamthatstem bearing cover) with a -6 stem (100mm)
I am using a size44 CAAD12,the same size with the GEN2 SSE. The new GEN3 size 44 and 48 are both more aggressive.

User avatar
Maximilian
Posts: 323
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2011 8:09 pm
Location: Warwickshire

by Maximilian

Verbal wrote:
Thu Jun 27, 2019 3:31 pm
No HM version for rim brakes. That’s all Folk.
Happy to have the latest Ss6 HM with rim brakes.
Whats the source? If true I'm done with production bikes.

Time to find someone who can build me an alu frame with CAAD9 geo or time to go to Sarto.

User avatar
Maximilian
Posts: 323
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2011 8:09 pm
Location: Warwickshire

by Maximilian

oldmac wrote:
Thu Jun 27, 2019 3:34 pm
Maximilian wrote:
Thu Jun 27, 2019 3:26 pm
oldmac wrote:
Thu Jun 27, 2019 3:12 pm
The geometry is more aggressive, so sad to see that. I can't find my size.
No it isn't. In a 58cm frame -->

SuperSix Evo Gen 3: Stack = 594mm. Reach = 395mm
SSE Gen 2: Stack = 584mm. Reach = 399mm
SSE Gen 1: Stack = 577mm. Reach = 399mm
CAAD9: Stack = 579mm. Reach = 399mm

Gen 1 SSE is almost identical to the CAAD9. The later two generations of the SSE have got taller and in the latest 3rd gen shorter in reach!

For the new one to fit me I'd need it slammed with a -17 110mm stem . At the moment my CAAD9 is slammed (on a #slamthatstem bearing cover) with a -6 stem (100mm)
I am using a size44 CAAD12,the same size with the GEN2 SSE. The new GEN3 size 44 and 48 are both more aggressive.
Hmm, strange that the bigger frames have got less agressive and the smaller franes more aggressive. 44/48cm are difficult frames do design though as the wheels don't get smaller so toe overlap becomes a big problem. I guess its more aggrressive to push the front wheel further out the combat this.

oldmac
Posts: 55
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2016 9:49 am

by oldmac

Maximilian wrote:
Thu Jun 27, 2019 3:39 pm
oldmac wrote:
Thu Jun 27, 2019 3:34 pm
Maximilian wrote:
Thu Jun 27, 2019 3:26 pm
oldmac wrote:
Thu Jun 27, 2019 3:12 pm
The geometry is more aggressive, so sad to see that. I can't find my size.
No it isn't. In a 58cm frame -->

SuperSix Evo Gen 3: Stack = 594mm. Reach = 395mm
SSE Gen 2: Stack = 584mm. Reach = 399mm
SSE Gen 1: Stack = 577mm. Reach = 399mm
CAAD9: Stack = 579mm. Reach = 399mm

Gen 1 SSE is almost identical to the CAAD9. The later two generations of the SSE have got taller and in the latest 3rd gen shorter in reach!

For the new one to fit me I'd need it slammed with a -17 110mm stem . At the moment my CAAD9 is slammed (on a #slamthatstem bearing cover) with a -6 stem (100mm)
I am using a size44 CAAD12,the same size with the GEN2 SSE. The new GEN3 size 44 and 48 are both more aggressive.
Hmm, strange that the bigger frames have got less agressive and the smaller franes more aggressive. 44/48cm are difficult frames do design though as the wheels don't get smaller so toe overlap becomes a big problem. I guess its more aggrressive to push the front wheel further out the combat this.
The GEN3 headtube is shorter,and the STACK is much smaller than the GEN2, so the small size becomes agressive

User avatar
Dan Gerous
Posts: 1495
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2007 6:28 pm

by Dan Gerous

For me, geo change seems good. 3mm higher stack and 3mm shorter reach in size 54 so I can get closer to fully slammed, maybe a slightly longer stem depending on the bar's reach. Slammed is a good thing with those headset spacers! :mrgreen:

Fork rake for a 54 though goes from 4.5 to 5.5 but with a slacker headtube angle, same trail value. Wheelbase grows too, should be very stable at high speed...
Last edited by Dan Gerous on Thu Jun 27, 2019 3:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Hexsense
Posts: 1165
Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2015 12:41 am

by Hexsense

Size 44, 48 are better than before.
SS evo 2
44 stack 51.4 reach 36.2 trail 7.3cm
48 stack 51.6 reach 36.9 trail 6.6cm
Both are pretty much the same stack with different length. And both have higher trail value higher than larger sizes.

SS evo 3
44 stack 50.4 reach 37. 0 trail 6.0cm
48 stack 51.9 reach 37.4 trail 5.8cm (now same trail value as every other larger sizes!, no more handling compromise on size 48.)
Trail value consistency is clearly the focussing parameter on the new SS Evo 3. Cannondale really deliberately make every size now handle the same in this generation. Well, maybe except size 44 that has trail=60 unlike the rest that has teail=58, but it is still much better than the old trail=7.3cm

The new stack and reach are scaling as it should be. If stack shrink, reach shrink too. Not going disproportion like the old version.
Last edited by Hexsense on Thu Jun 27, 2019 3:59 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Beaver
Posts: 783
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2004 6:06 pm

by Beaver

guyc wrote:
Thu Jun 27, 2019 2:41 pm
Claims 30w saved over the older model. That's at the 30mph that we're all riding all the time because we're all WT Pros.
Where does that come from? What did they compare? Hard to believe. Maybe with really, really bad wheels on the SuperSix II. :D

User avatar
Maximilian
Posts: 323
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2011 8:09 pm
Location: Warwickshire

by Maximilian

Dan Gerous wrote:
Thu Jun 27, 2019 3:50 pm
For me, geo change seems good. 3mm higher stack and 3mm shorter reach in size 54 so I can get closer to fully slammed, maybe a slightly longer stem depending on the bar's reach. Slammed is a good thing with those headset spacers! :mrgreen:

Fork rake for a 54 though goes from 4.5 to 5.5 but with a slacker headtube angle, same trail value. Wheelbase grows too, should be very stable at high speed...
I could live with that change on my size but 15mm taller for the 58cm frame is bulls--t. I though this was meant to be a race bike...

by Weenie


gbrnole
Posts: 37
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2018 9:40 pm

by gbrnole

Dan Gerous wrote:
Thu Jun 27, 2019 3:06 pm
guyc wrote:
Thu Jun 27, 2019 2:41 pm
First UK store I've seen with them:

https://www.7hundred.co.uk/facetresults ... m=supersix

https://www.7hundred.co.uk/56534/premiu ... black.aspx

Top of the range DA Di2 is £8999 - comes with a Power2Max (as do many of them), 45mm Knot wheels and a top-tube logo that looks like a toddler was let loose with some Letraset.

Claims 30w saved over the older model. That's at the 30mph that we're all riding all the time because we're all WT Pros.
30w is huge, even at 30mph, even for amateurs! Yes most don't ride at these average speeds, but we do go faster than that sometimes during rides and even if you average 30km/h, you'll still save quite some power. Even if you ride in the mountains and average 25km/h, it will descend muuuuuuuch faster, save you energy in the valleys when you do ride fast. I get that reaction for small gains like the new Scott Addict saving 6w at 45km/h over the old one, that's not much but 30w is quite an impressive improvement many even non-pros should be able to feel and take advantage of. :thumbup:

Personally, I like the Helvetica style small logo and more minimal, simple graphics... But it's a matter of taste, there will always be people happy and others not happy about paint jobs, but it's inevitable, with every new bike releases come whiners about this color and that color and that graphic or the logo's too big we're not billboards, now it's too small...

Personally I really like these bikes. Only gripe is that nasty Garmin mount for the KNOT cockpit and having non-activated powermeters that have next to no value if you want to sell it and save weight or use a powermeter you already have.
Hard time believing 30w. Cannondale's own wind tunnel results show on average a 0.02 cda improvement between the new and old evo. About 20w. They would have to be comparing only the extreme ends of the yaw angles, that make up a minimal exposure time real world, to get to 30w.

Post Reply