Road Bike, Cycling Forums banner

1 - 8 of 8 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
42 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I have an 05 CAAD 7 frame in matte grey that I'd like to trade for an older frame/bike depending on condition. Track bike, road bike, but not mtn bike. Anybody have something laying around that would be interesting.

My frame is 56cm. Nice, but I'd like something older, and between 54-56cm.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
92 Posts
I have an old 56 crit frame (blue) in good shape, also an old tange (japanese) bianchi that I stripped and painted semi-flat black.

You can see the crit if you look at the post your cannondale pics. It's the first one.

I might be interested in trading/buying.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
168 Posts
what the heck

I've got an older 2.8 road frame in a 54 for my commuter bike, but have no need for a 56 frame. i must ask though, why in the world would you want to trade for an older, more punishing frame?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,302 Posts
so when did the cannondale change from a harsh punishing frame to a kinder gentler frame? was this with the CAAD (or CAD which is what I think the first series after the 2.8 was...CAD"something"). earlier 2.8? 3.0?

and what things caused this change in the disposition of the ride? variable aluminum thickness? thinner diameter tubes? thinner walled tubes? different geometry? hourglass seatstay? all of this? what? what ? what?

I'm just trying to understand the engineering/science behind the "kindler gentler dales".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
168 Posts
the hourglass stays were the most noticible improvement. i'm sure the thinner aluminum and variable wall thickness helped but most of that is invisible to the eye and most likely to the butt as well.

comfy cannondales is a relative term, if you were to compare a 2.8, a caad 7/8, and a specialized roubaix. the roubaix would have you using those cheap dr scholes gellin' lines whle the cannondales would be a bit harder. if you just compare the 2 cannondales though the caad 7/8 will be much gentler on the body.

thus far on the 2.8 i've yet to notice any bottom bracket flex, so the frame is plenty stiff for out of the saddle sprints and climbs but it also transmits any discontinuity in the road directly to your body.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
598 Posts
I'll second the hourglass stays. I went from a 2.8 to a CAAD5 frameset, and the ride difference is night and day as far as long-term fatigue to the body. Mind you, the parts all swapped over, so it wasn't a component change that facilitated the good feelings.

I can't speak for the CAAD7/8. I've never ridden either. The 5 is awesome, and makes a great crit/rcing bike, though.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,302 Posts
I finally got my 1990 3.0 series built up and rode it about 40 miles this weekend. Compared to my 1985 frame it does feel gentler when I was sitting in the saddle peddling. Those much smaller seatstays do appear to transmit less/(absorb more?) of the road nuances (mostly roughness in the pavement). I am quite pleased. I am not going as far yet as to say I like it better. Only miles will tell. But yeah I'm quite pleased thus far. It seemed to accelerate similarly to the old dale. I need to ride it more.
 
1 - 8 of 8 Posts
Top