Cannondale R1000



W

Wendy

Guest
Hello-

I am new here, and wanted to say thanks to all of you who make this
group a valuable resource. I have a Trek hybrid, and have long been
wanting to step up to a nice road bike.

I've combed through the archives, searched the bike reviews, and
agonized for hours about a new bike. Looked at Trek, LeMonde, and a
couple of other comparable brands, and have decided on a new R1000 with
the CAAD-8 frame. With full Ultegra components and the Kyserium Elite
wheelset, this bike comes in without pedals for around $1800 at the
LBS. I am thinking about some Ultegra pedals, and from the reviews I
have read, the saddle has got to go. I am not a racer, but a serious
recreational rider interested in club and fitness riding. I would like
to hear any ideas about upgrades, pedals, shoes, and general
got-to-have items that I should consider. I'll be moving soon to the
Northern Virginia area, and I understand there are some nice rides
there. If anyone has any advice concerning the advantages (if any) of
a triple in that area, I would appreciate it!

Thanks,

Wendy
 
"Wendy" <[email protected]> wrote:

>Hello-
>
>I am new here, and wanted to say thanks to all of you who make this
>group a valuable resource. I have a Trek hybrid, and have long been
>wanting to step up to a nice road bike.
>
>I've combed through the archives, searched the bike reviews, and
>agonized for hours about a new bike. Looked at Trek, LeMonde, and a
>couple of other comparable brands, and have decided on a new R1000 with
>the CAAD-8 frame. With full Ultegra components and the Kyserium Elite
>wheelset, this bike comes in without pedals for around $1800 at the
>LBS. I am thinking about some Ultegra pedals, and from the reviews I
>have read, the saddle has got to go. I am not a racer, but a serious
>recreational rider interested in club and fitness riding. I would like
>to hear any ideas about upgrades, pedals, shoes, and general
>got-to-have items that I should consider. I'll be moving soon to the
>Northern Virginia area, and I understand there are some nice rides
>there. If anyone has any advice concerning the advantages (if any) of
>a triple in that area, I would appreciate it!

My wife has the same bike, though a few model years older (frame:
CAAD7). She loves it. It's light, stiff, and comfortable. Hers
actually has a 105 bottom bracket, front der, brakes, and shifters.

The Ultegra group is likely the best value for the money in the
Shimano line, though I'd recommend using KoolStop pads the first time
you need to change brake pads.

The Ksyriums are a very good wheelset--one of the primary selling
features of the bike at its price.

As to the triple: if you feel you need the lower gears to get yourself
up the hills without using too slow a cadence, there's no downside to
getting the triple. Hers has it.

As to shoes (and saddles): you have to get what fits. The choice of
Look vs. Speedplay vs. Shimano Pedal Design (SPD) pedals is largely
personal preference.

As to accessories: you'll likely want a small seat wedge bag and the
right minimal tools for roadside repairs (likely a multitool, a
pump/CO2 setup, a set of tire levers, and a spare tube), a water
bottle cage and bottle (or a pair of each), and a cyclecomputer
(Cateye Mity 8 springs to mind).

Clothes: jersey, cycling shorts, a pair of gloves, eye protection, a
helmet (or not. Your call).

Have fun!
 
AVOID ALUMINUM AT ALL COSTS!!!!!! Buy a good steel frame . For $1800
the Lemond Buenos Aires with steel and carbon is the sweetest ride out
there.
 
On Tue, 19 Jul 2005 00:01:43 GMT, Neil Brooks <[email protected]>
wrote:


>
>My wife has the same bike, though a few model years older (frame:
>CAAD7). She loves it. It's light, stiff, and comfortable. Hers
>actually has a 105 bottom bracket, front der, brakes, and shifters.
>
>The Ultegra group is likely the best value for the money in the
>Shimano line, though I'd recommend using KoolStop pads the first time
>you need to change brake pads.
>
>The Ksyriums are a very good wheelset--one of the primary selling
>features of the bike at its price.
>
>As to the triple: if you feel you need the lower gears to get yourself
>up the hills without using too slow a cadence, there's no downside to
>getting the triple. Hers has it.
>
>As to shoes (and saddles): you have to get what fits. The choice of
>Look vs. Speedplay vs. Shimano Pedal Design (SPD) pedals is largely
>personal preference.
>
>As to accessories: you'll likely want a small seat wedge bag and the
>right minimal tools for roadside repairs (likely a multitool, a
>pump/CO2 setup, a set of tire levers, and a spare tube), a water
>bottle cage and bottle (or a pair of each), and a cyclecomputer
>(Cateye Mity 8 springs to mind).
>
>Clothes: jersey, cycling shorts, a pair of gloves, eye protection, a
>helmet (or not. Your call).
>
>Have fun!

Wendy, Neil covers it well. I will add that I have the Ultegra pedals
and I am very happy with them, only other reference is SPD. I think
Pearl Izumi makes a decent shoe, if it fits, they offer only whole
sizes[or did]. I went to the Sidi Genius 4[now 5] in Lorica. I got
them on sale, pricey, but a great shoe.

I would suggest that you get the Cateye Astrale 8 cyclocomputer, as it
includes cadence. A nice training feature. I also vote for the triple,
as there is little downside to having one. The downsides are weight
and doubles may shift a little better. Triples do shift just fine, so
don't be concerned.

If you are going to buy a lot of extras, including clothing, then
consider joining Team Performance. For $20 you get 10% on future
purchase, upgraded to second day shipping, and Team Performance
discounts.
http://www.performancebike.com/

Team Performance info:
http://www.performancebike.com/team_p.cfm


Life is Good!
Jeff
 
>I would suggest that you get the Cateye Astrale 8 cyclocomputer, as it
>includes cadence. A nice training feature.

YMMV, but I've found cadence to be of limited value. It doesn't take long to
know what which gears to be using at given speeds.

>I also vote for the triple,
>as there is little downside to having one. The downsides are weight
>and doubles may shift a little better. Triples do shift just fine, so
>don't be concerned.

If you have any thought you may want a triple - get it.

That said, triples do have disadvantages, though they are slight and subtle:

1) Q-factor (distance between pedals) is usually wider with triples. Doesn't
matter for some (most?) people, but is supposedly a problem for some.

2) Weight is slightly higher for triple crank, but the difference is so
small I don't think it really matters.

3) Doubles are definitely more bombproof in the shifting quality department,
and triple STI is more finicky to get the adjustment dialed in. That said,
STI triples work pretty well these days.

4) Gruppos using 10 speed cassettes and double cranks can be setup to cover
the gearing range of a triple crank while still leaving reasonable gaps
between the gears. This isn't really an option with a 9 or 8 speed
cassette.




Chris Neary
[email protected]

"Science, freedom, beauty, adventure: what more could
you ask of life? Bicycling combined all the elements I
loved" - Adapted from a quotation by Charles Lindbergh
 
Dan Birchall wrote:
> [email protected] ([email protected]) wrote:
> > AVOID ALUMINUM AT ALL COSTS!!!!!!
>
> Why?
>
> > Buy a good steel frame .
>
> Why?
>
> What about carbon fiber? Titanium?

I considered all of the above options. LeMonde makes good bikes; I
nearly bought a Tourmalet a while back. Titanium is an amazing
material that would, I am sure, make a great bicycle frame. The Trek
OCLV bikes are as good as they come and I know I wouldn't go wrong with
one. I just like the Cannondale bikes- the fit and finish on them is
as good as I have seen, and for the money, the R1000 is the most bang
for the buck. In all fairness I do want to give the Six-13 frame a
look, but I really don't want to spend over $3,000, and that is where
that frame would put me. If I were interested in competitive riding, I
would spend the money and get a Six-13, Madone, Colnago, Merckx, or
something along those lines. I just spent a year in Iraq as a
contractor and I have the money, but such a bike would be wasted on me.
A poser I am not :)

I know the aluminum frame rides a bit stiffer than steel or carbon, and
the time may come when I will want to buy a carbon frame. Now is not
that time; I am looking to ride 100-150 miles a week, not a day. I do
want to go fast, and I want to have confidence in my bike without
worrying myself to death over damaging it. The R1000 is the best fit
for me at this time.

Thanks for all the suggestions, and I'll let you all know how things
go!

Wendy
 
<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> AVOID ALUMINUM AT ALL COSTS!!!!!! Buy a good steel frame . For $1800
> the Lemond Buenos Aires with steel and carbon is the sweetest ride out
> there.


Nonsense. there's nothing wrong with aluminum frames, the ride may be a
little harsh when compared with other materials, but probably not enough to
be very noticeable.
 
I love Cannondale bikes- I have two- a 'cross and mtb. I dont know
your weight. If you are 120 or less the aluminum may not feel as
punishing. Over that and you reaaly need to try a good steel bike. I'm
not on commission and dont really care what you buy. However I do want
you to enjoy cycling. The R1000 is a fine bike as are all 'dales but
for the money you should at least try a bianchi, gunnar, jamis or other
good steel bike. For racing 20 miles or less I'd probably choose a
light stiff Alum. bike. But for club, charity and unofficial sporited
rides I am so happy with my steel Lemond Buenos Aires. Bumps are not
noticable and yet the bike tracks perfectly and can still sprint and
climb. You say you dont want to ride 100 miles per day---yet. That
cannondale will beat you up by 50 miles. You will have trouble
damaging a steel frame unless you are the she-hulk but your mind and
body will thank you and you WILL want to do 100 miles per day on a
properly sized steel bike. Lemonds have a geomtery that doesnt fit
many women as they have shorter torsos and Lemonds have longer top
tubes. My ex is 5'10" and couldnt get comfortable on Lemond. She bought
a Specialized aliuminum
bike and on our first 50 mile charity ride she was *****in and moaning
while I still felt fresh on the Lemond. Do yourself a favor- Buy steel
 
On 19 Jul 2005 05:10:32 -0700, [email protected] wrote:

>Aluminum is stiff and punishing. Carbon has a "dead" feel and titanium
>is too flexy for >180 lb riders. Steel is real.

Been reading Bicycling Magazine again, I see.. Thanks for educating us
all. ROFL.

G.B.
 
[email protected] ([email protected]) wrote:
> Aluminum is stiff and punishing. Carbon has a "dead" feel and titanium
> is too flexy for >180 lb riders. Steel is real.

Platitudes are _so_ unbecoming, especially from someone who claims to
have a couple aluminum bikes. ;)

I grew up riding steel. I'm >180, and my last steel bike flexed any time
I got up out of the saddle. I switched to aluminum in '87 and haven't
looked back - in fact, my current bike is a '98 c'dale xr800 cross bike,
quite similar to one of yours. I've been known to do 100km on it without
a second thought.

--
Dan Birchall - http://danbirchall.multiply.com/ - images, words, technology
 
I have an '01 xr800 but I put carbon fork. I've ridden it 50 miles and
with the carbon fork it's okay but NOWHERE near as smooth as my
Lemond. The mtb has fat tires and front shock shock Al frame is less of
an issue plus I havent ridden it in two years. MTB's suck. You may
need to find a better steel bike. Then the 100km will be more fun.
 
On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 15:51:59 -0700, Wendy wrote:

> I've combed through the archives, searched the bike reviews, and agonized
> for hours about a new bike. Looked at Trek, LeMonde, and a couple of
> other comparable brands, and have decided on a new R1000 with the CAAD-8
> frame. With full Ultegra components and the Kyserium Elite wheelset, this
> bike comes in without pedals for around $1800 at the LBS. I am thinking
> about some Ultegra pedals, and from the reviews I have read, the saddle
> has got to go. I am not a racer, but a serious recreational rider
> interested in club and fitness riding.

Then excuse me for asking why the heck do you want to spend $1800 on a
race bike then?

'Dales are fabulously great climbers and imho, the most uncomfortable
frames I've ever ridden.

Take off your Lance coloured wraparounds and fully assess what bike you
actually need.

Certainly you want sporty for the club rides, but imo, comfort's gonna
trump all.

At some point you're going to want to do some sporty day touring in that
pretty part of the country--wouldn't it be nice to be able to throw on a
rack and fenders at that point? Why limit yourself with a pure bred racing
bike? The speed and performance difference between a dedicated racer and
something with provisions for practicality are gonna be negligible if both
bikes have similar wheels/tires.

Anything with standard reach brakes and a few useful braze-ons gets my
vote. A Surly Pacer frame or similar might be in order.

Whatever you get, make sure it fits.



> I would like to hear any ideas
> about upgrades, pedals, shoes, and general got-to-have items that I
> should consider. I'll be moving soon to the Northern Virginia area, and
> I understand there are some nice rides there. If anyone has any advice
> concerning the advantages (if any) of a triple in that area, I would
> appreciate it!

I've only driven through the area, and it seems a triple with a tight rear
cluster would be rather nice in that area.

For pedals, I like basic Looks as they're easy to click in to, but some
decent spds and touring shoes with recessed cleats are probably the
smartest bet for most of us. Ever gone in to a country store to grab a
Gatorade and ended up on the tile floor due to a cleat induced Keystone
Cop moment?
 
On Tue, 19 Jul 2005 06:13:52 -0500, di wrote:

> he ride may be a
> little harsh when compared with other materials, but probably not enough
> to be very noticeable.

My aluminum Marin city bike, even with 35c tires at 70psi, required
clenching your teeth on bumpy bits so they wouldn't shatter from the
vibration.

My steel road bike's ride compared to that is like a magic carpet. You
feel the bumps, but it's like being slapped with a fresh flounder instead
of an anvil.


very noticeable. ;)

Designs vary of course...
 
[email protected] wrote:
> Aluminum is stiff and punishing. Carbon has a "dead" feel and titanium
> is too flexy for >180 lb riders. Steel is real.

Gee, all these years my ti frame has been too flexy for my 215 pounds +
commuting gear. I guess I never would have known that without your
expert help.

Steel may be real (I have two steel bikes as well, and I know enough to
judgee the bike, not the metal), but your expertise is entirely
imaginary.

RichC
 
<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Aluminum is stiff and punishing. Carbon has a "dead" feel and titanium
> is too flexy for >180 lb riders. Steel is real.
>

You have it all figured out don't you? I have frames made of all three
materials and don't agree with your statement at all.
 
maxo wrote:

> Then excuse me for asking why the heck do you want to spend $1800 on a
> race bike then?

I like to go fast, and it's in my budget.

> 'Dales are fabulously great climbers and imho, the most uncomfortable
> frames I've ever ridden.

You probably have a point here, and I am going to ride a Le Monde
before I leap.

> Take off your Lance coloured wraparounds and fully assess what bike you
> actually need.

I have some Ray-Bans. They got me through Mosul and Baghdad, so I
expect they'll be fine in Virginia. I don't *need* a bike- I want one.

> Certainly you want sporty for the club rides, but imo, comfort's gonna
> trump all.

Again, you have a point here, and I'll look before I leap.

> At some point you're going to want to do some sporty day touring in that
> pretty part of the country--wouldn't it be nice to be able to throw on a
> rack and fenders at that point? Why limit yourself with a pure bred racing
> bike? The speed and performance difference between a dedicated racer and
> something with provisions for practicality are gonna be negligible if both
> bikes have similar wheels/tires.

That's what the Harley-Davidson is for :)

This isn't directed at you- you have made some good points that bear
consideration. But it sure seems that a lot of people on this
newsgroup insist that if I (or anyone else for that matter) don't
listen to their advice I am a doomed fool. Jesus Christ, get a grip,
guys- different people want different things for different reasons.

Wendy
 
> maxo wrote:
> >
> > 'Dales are fabulously great climbers and imho, the most uncomfortable
> > frames I've ever ridden.

Wendy wrote
>
>
> You probably have a point here, and I am going to ride a Le Monde
> before I leap.
>
I have a Cannondale R1000 and a Trek OCLV and can't tell much difference in
ride comfort untill about two or three hours in the saddle. And the main
difference then is that, with the Cannondale, I find myself spending serious
effort avoiding any roughness in the pavement. At short distances, the only
difference I notice is the way they sound.

So my advice, FWIW, is that if you plan to do long rides, take long test
rides.
 
On 19 Jul 2005 16:05:18 -0700, "Wendy" <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>
>maxo wrote:
>
>> Then excuse me for asking why the heck do you want to spend $1800 on a
>> race bike then?
>
>I like to go fast, and it's in my budget.
>
>> 'Dales are fabulously great climbers and imho, the most uncomfortable
>> frames I've ever ridden.
>
>You probably have a point here, and I am going to ride a Le Monde
>before I leap.
>
>> Take off your Lance coloured wraparounds and fully assess what bike you
>> actually need.
>
>I have some Ray-Bans. They got me through Mosul and Baghdad, so I
>expect they'll be fine in Virginia. I don't *need* a bike- I want one.
>
>> Certainly you want sporty for the club rides, but imo, comfort's gonna
>> trump all.
>
>Again, you have a point here, and I'll look before I leap.
>
>> At some point you're going to want to do some sporty day touring in that
>> pretty part of the country--wouldn't it be nice to be able to throw on a
>> rack and fenders at that point? Why limit yourself with a pure bred racing
>> bike? The speed and performance difference between a dedicated racer and
>> something with provisions for practicality are gonna be negligible if both
>> bikes have similar wheels/tires.
>
>That's what the Harley-Davidson is for :)
>
>This isn't directed at you- you have made some good points that bear
>consideration. But it sure seems that a lot of people on this
>newsgroup insist that if I (or anyone else for that matter) don't
>listen to their advice I am a doomed fool. Jesus Christ, get a grip,
>guys- different people want different things for different reasons.
>
>Wendy

There's just a lot of enthusiasm around here. No need to mistake it for
tedious moralization. Folks just get caught up in their passion and don't
realize they've kind of glossed over your question. It's all good though -
the passion for cycling and the strong opinions, that is. It's just
contagious excitement for the most part.

When I first switched to clipless I could hardly contain myself, resulting
in a very pushy attitude towards those that were still using toe clips or
plain pedals. But it was well-meaning, if you get my drift. I learned to
laugh at myself.

Uh, but don't even -think- about getting a straight-bar bike. You simply
-must- get dropbars, besides the varied hand positions, they're narrower
giving less strain on the wrists, and...oops, there I go again. ;-)

jj
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

aleeharmon
specialized comp vs. cannondale R1000 for racing and some tri's
Replies
3
Views
2K
Road Cycling
aleeharmon
aleeharmon
R
Trek 2300 or Cannondale R1000 or other?
Replies
22
Views
4K
Road Cycling
waterboy420
waterboy420
M
  • Locked
Cannondale R1000 (CAAD7) question
Replies
10
Views
6K
Road Cycling
Marcin
M
V
Cannondale synapse vs kestrel rt1100
Replies
2
Views
2K
Road Cycling
cyclintom
cyclintom
F
New bike. cannondale synapse. 2007?
Replies
7
Views
3K
Road Cycling
Frank Rubio
F
Top Bottom Back