Cannondale R3000 as crit bike

[Nicholas]

"patch70" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Marc Millstone [/i]
> That is the manual not the warranty.[/QUOTE] Oh, well
> that completely changes the bike's life expectancy
> then.
>
>

Originally posted by Marc Millstone wrote:
> > I was speaking for Cannondale frames in general not
> > the CAAD7.
>
>
> Given the original poster was asking about the R3000, I
> was referring to that bike. And as Cannondale themselves
> say that it is good for a year or two of racing (again,
> see original poster), I stand by my comment that it is not
> a bike that is built to last.

I haven't seen anyone mention the independent fatigue-
testing of bike frames in Germany. These tests show
Cannondale frames (from CAAD3 through to CAAD7) outlasting
most other frames. The steel frames tested seemed to come
in last. So I guess it's all about the engineering, not
the material.

See http://www.efbe.de/erenn.htm

There's lots of stuff there (in English).

Cheers, Nicholas

 

[Chalo]

patch70 <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> The Cannondale is not a bike that is built to last. If you
> are happy to replace it in a season or two, fine. However,
> if you were planning on riding this bike for more than 3
> years, I'd look more at those Litespeeds & Specializeds
> they have.

Tell it to my Cannondales. 3 of the 4 of them are teenagers
now. A couple of them have tens of thousands of miles to
show for it. And I've weighed between 250 and 400 pounds all
that time.

All C'dales may not be equal, like in the '80s, but I have
laid waste to more steel bikes with a lot less riding than I
did on my aluminum Cannondales.

The couple of times I have cracked C'dale frames, they have
been replaced under warranty along with whatever new parts
were needed to accomodate design updates.

Chalo Colina

 

[Anonymous]

"patch70" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Marc Millstone [/i]
> That is the manual not the warranty.[/QUOTE] Oh, well
> that completely changes the bike's life expectancy
> then.
>
>

Originally posted by Marc Millstone wrote:
> > I was speaking for Cannondale frames in general not
> > the CAAD7.
>
>
> Given the original poster was asking about the R3000, I
> was referring to that bike. And as Cannondale themselves
> say that it is good for a year or two of racing (again,
> see original poster), I stand by my comment that it is not
> a bike that is built to last.

I am confused, can you give me a pointer to where Cannondale
says that R3000 is good for only a year or two of racing?

 

[patch70]

Originally posted by Anonymous
I am confused, can you give me a pointer to where Cannondale
says that R3000 is good for only a year or two of racing?

If you need me to post it again:

http://www.cannondale.com/dt_querie...als/0115936.pdf

Optimo and CAAD7 bikes are designed to be today's ultimate lightweight road racing frames. You must understand that Optimo and CAAD7 bike are intended to give an aggressive racer a competitive edge for a season or two of racing. A less aggressive rider will enjoy longer frame life.
Please understand that you are choosing light weight and a shorter frame life over more weight and a longer frame life. Please understand that you are choosing light weight over more dent resistant or rugged frames that weigh more. All frames that are very light need frequent inspection for cracks that would indicate that the frame is worn out from fatigue.
Optimo and CAAD7 frames are designed to ride, race and win on the road. They are not designed to take abuse or be a rugged
workhorse. Do not install a rack, panniers and go touring! Do not ride cyclocross or off road!

Originally posted by Chalo
Tell it to my Cannondales. 3 of the 4 of them are teenagers
now. A couple of them have tens of thousands of miles to
show for it. And I've weighed between 250 and 400 pounds all
that time.

That is all very nice but it does not answer the question of whether the R3000 is good as a crit bike. If I were about to shell out the big $ on a high end bike, I would not be re-assured if the company itself were telling me the bike is only good for a season or two, particularly when I know it is made out of aluminium foil. There are plenty of similarly priced, similarly weighted, bikes that are built to last longer. I personally can't afford a bike every two years. Plus, if I were to consider buying a current model of any bike, a review of different bikes made by that company 13 or more years ago isn't very helpful.

 

[Michael Press]

patch70 <[email protected]> wrote:

>> Originally posted by Michael Press I've put 10,000 miles
>> on a CAAD3 road from from 1995, including 2 crashes.
>
>CAAD3, surprising as it may be to you, is not CAAD7. Have a
>close look at the 3 and the 7. They are different.

Gee, you're just freakin hilarious. Not.

Let's see, your original quote was:

"The Cannondale is not a bike that is built to last. If you
are happy to replace it in a season or two, fine. However,
if you were planning on riding this bike for more than 3
years, I'd look more at those Litespeeds & Specializeds
they have."

Since you're so good with numbers, show me the 7 in
that quote.

You seem to have a problem differentiating between what
you're thinking and what you actually post. Try re-reading
your posts before you send them.

Michael

 

[Anonymous]

"patch70" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Anonymous [/i]
> I am confused, can you give me a pointer to where
> Cannondale says that R3000 is good for only a year or
> two of racing? [/QUOTE] If you need me to post it
> again:
>
> [url="http://www.cannondale.com/dt_...www.cannondale.com/dt_querie...als/0115936.p-
> df[/url]
>
> Optimo and CAAD7 bikes are designed to be today's ultimate
> lightweight
road racing frames. You must understand that Optimo and
CAAD7 bike are intended to give an aggressive racer a
competitive edge for a season or two of racing. A less
aggressive rider will enjoy longer frame life.
> Please understand that you are choosing light weight and a
> shorter frame
life over more weight and a longer frame life. Please
understand that you are choosing light weight over more dent
resistant or rugged frames that weigh more. All frames that
are very light need frequent inspection for cracks that
would indicate that the frame is worn out from fatigue.
> Optimo and CAAD7 frames are designed to ride, race and win
> on the road.
They are not designed to take abuse or be a rugged
> workhorse. Do not install a rack, panniers and go touring!
> Do not ride
cyclocross or off road!

Thanks. I saw the first post but missed that it was directly
from Cannondale.

 

[Sdmike]

"Paul Southworth" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article
> <[email protected]>, Art
> M <[email protected]> wrote:
> >Any advice on whether a Cannondale R3000 (Shim DA 10) is
> >a decent bike for crits?
> >
> >I'll be buying from the LBS that sponsors my team. I can
> >get a discount on some of the bikes including that one.
> >They also carry Litespeed, Giant, Specialized (just
> >frames in the latter?)... They offer a good team discount
> >on an all aluminum S-works frame w/ carbon fork, but to
> >build it up (my old clunker is 7 spd) would probably cost
> >more than the Cdale.
>
> Any bike that fits and you don't mind crashing is good for
> crits. Pick fit over any other factor.
>
> --Paul
>
Except for the hint to keep it as cheap as possible too.
Crashes happen.

M

 

[Sdmike]

<snip>
> I'm just curious, since I have no idea what kind of
> handling or ride characteristics would be popular with
> crit riders.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Carl Fogel

Are you being deliberately obtuse?

M

 

[carlfogel]

On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 13:39:54 -0700, "SDMike"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>
><snip>
>> I'm just curious, since I have no idea what kind of
>> handling or ride characteristics would be popular with
>> crit riders.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Carl Fogel
>
>Are you being deliberately obtuse?
>
>M
>

Dear Mike,

Nope. I'm just wondering what actual advantages were being
implied for Cannondales for crit riding. "Geometry" is about
all that I've managed to coax out of anyone so far.

Your comment suggests that you consider yourself not
obtuse, so perhaps you can help--are there any specific
geometries that help crit riders as opposed to touring,
time trial, and so forth?

That is, do crit riders demand quicker handling at the
expense of stability? Do they sacrifice the smoothness of
longer chainstays for the stiffness of a shorter triangle?

Do the Cannondales have shorter or longer chainstays than
other crit bikes? Different seat tube angles? Steeper fork
tubes, more rake, less trail?

The original post claimed that there was a reason why
Cannondales are so popular in crit riding (other posts have
disagreed). When I asked what the reason was, "geometry" was
the enigmatic answer.

Hoping for something clearer,

Carl Fogel

 

[patch70]

Originally posted by Michael Press
Originally posted by Michael Press I've put 10,000 miles on a CAAD3 road from from 1995, including 2 crashes.

CAAD3, surprising as it may be to you, is not CAAD7. Have a close look at the 3 and the 7. They are different.

snip

You seem to have a problem differentiating between what
you're thinking and what you actually post. Try re-reading
your posts before you send them.

Michael

I am very sorry that it is so difficult for you to understand. The original question was about whether the the R3000 is good as a crit bike. Given that Cannondale itself says that particular bike is good for a season or two of racing, that makes it pretty clear that it is not a bike that is built to last. We are all really happy that you enjoy your CAAD3. However, that does not really help answer the question about the CAAD7. Good luck with future efforts at comprehension.

 

[Art M]

"patch70" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Anonymous [/i]
> I am confused, can you give me a pointer to where
> Cannondale says that R3000 is good for only a year or
> two of racing? [/QUOTE] If you need me to post it
> again:
>
> [url="http://www.cannondale.com/dt_...www.cannondale.com/dt_querie...als/0115936.p-
> df[/url]
>

Can you give that link again. It was shortened with ellipsis
last time in MS OE.

Thanks, Art

 

[carlfogel]

On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 22:24:20 -0000,
[email protected] (Dan Birchall) wrote:

>[email protected] ([email protected]) wrote:
>> are there any specific geometries that help crit riders
>> as opposed to touring, time trial, and so forth?
>
>Crit riders (I've ridden 2 crits in my life, and finished
>1) need a bike that is "jumpy." It needs to be able to go
>fast, but also be maneuverable. A time trial involves a lot
>fewer competitors nearby, and a tour involves people who're
>not trying to beat you.
>
>Anyway, a couple things that give a bike that feel are:
>
>1. Frame stiffness - pedaling energy goes to the back
> wheel, rather than flexing the frame. Large-diameter
> tubing makes for a stiffer frame.
>
>2. A short rear triangle (and short wheelbase overall) -
> I'm not sure why this makes a bike feel faster to me,
> but it definitely aids maneuverability.
>
>Cannondale's racing bikes - even the cyclocross bike I ride
>these days - definitely tend to have those two attributes.
>Whether they have them more than someone else's, I really
>can't say.
>
>I don't have the hard science, I'm not a metallurgist, but
>maybe this can serve as "part of" your answer.

Dear Dan,

Aha!

So crit riders might prefer the shorter and (all other
things being equal) stiffer wheelbase for less flexing over
the smoother ride of a longer wheelbase.

The same would be true for a faster handling geometry
("jumpy" is just as good as "twitchy"), which would also
tend toward a shorter wheelbase and a steeper fork angle.

I hadn't even thought about whether Rubenesque frames would
attract the roving eyes of crit riders, but I suppose that
might explain why no one else spoke up when I asked what was
so different about Cannondales--who wants to admit that they
like fat-framed bikes?

(Like you, I can't say whether Cannondales really are
plumper than other brands, but I'd be fascinated if anyone
else could point out specific differences in the geometries
being offered.)

Thanks for taking the trouble to answer my question,

Carl Fogel

 

[patch70]

Originally posted by Art M
Can you give that link again. It was shortened with ellipsis
last time in MS OE.

Try (without the http bit):
www.cannondale.com/Asset/iu_files/0115936.pdf

 

[Anthony Leveroc]

On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 23:39:10 GMT, "Art M"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>
>"patch70" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> Anonymous [/i]
>> I am confused, can you give me a pointer to where
>> Cannondale says that R3000 is good for only a year or
>> two of racing? [/QUOTE] If you need me to post it
>> again:
>>
>> [url="http://www.cannondale.com/dt_...www.cannondale.com/dt_querie...als/0115936.p-
>> df[/url]
>>
>
>
>Can you give that link again. It was shortened with
>ellipsis last time in MS OE.
>
>Thanks, Art
>

The document can be found at:

http://www.cannondale.com/Asset/iu_files/0115936.pdf

- --
Anthony [remove 123 to reply]