the FATTEST Cannondale?

[[email protected]]

I'm looking for a cannondale frame/fork for an art project and I would
prefer the year of the largest tubing. I remember it was about that
time the UCI declared a limit on tubing diameter so Cannondale went
smaller in response. Anybody remember the largest diameter
cannondales?

PS, I'm looking for a conventional diamond frame design, not any of the
mtb suspension bikes.

Rick

 

[D'ohBoy]

snippage of Q: re: fattest Canny tube bike

Rick:

My father's R1000 has a downtube about as fat as the bottom bracket
shell. Don't recall the year, probably 1999 or prior. It is one
MASSIVE tube!

D'ohBoy

 

[[email protected]]

D'ohBoy wrote:
> snippage of Q: re: fattest Canny tube bike
>
> Rick:
>
> My father's R1000 has a downtube about as fat as the bottom bracket
> shell. Don't recall the year, probably 1999 or prior. It is one
> MASSIVE tube!
>
> D'ohBoy

I had one of the early models in about 1987. It was huge. I took it to
Italy and the old guys said I had a pregnant bike, and made rude
pantomimes demonstrating how and where the little ones would come out.
Down-tube must have been 3"! Probably wasn't that fat, but at the time
it seemed crazy-fat.

Joseph

 

[Chalo]

[email protected] wrote:
> I'm looking for a cannondale frame/fork for an art project and I would
> prefer the year of the largest tubing. I remember it was about that
> time the UCI declared a limit on tubing diameter so Cannondale went
> smaller in response. Anybody remember the largest diameter
> cannondales?
>
> PS, I'm looking for a conventional diamond frame design, not any of the
> mtb suspension bikes.

Sometime in the early '90s, Cannondale's 2" straight-gauge downtubes
began to give way to conical downtubes that taper from about 2.25" at
the BB to about 1.625" at the head tube. Along with this change, the
stays got skinnier. The changeover began with the racing-type bikes;
touring bikes maintained the old frame style for a few years more. To
my knowledge, some of the MTBs kept the 2" downtubes all along, but
they started getting thinner stays about 1990.

Right about 1989, all Canondales had 2" downtubes and big fat rear
stays. Before that they had thinner downtubes, and much after that,
they all lost girth in the stays.

Be aware that while the fatness of a C'dale frame was freaky-looking
back then, now it's just not all that unusual to the eye.

Chalo Colina

 

[G.T.]

"Chalo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> [email protected] wrote:
> > I'm looking for a cannondale frame/fork for an art project and I would
> > prefer the year of the largest tubing. I remember it was about that
> > time the UCI declared a limit on tubing diameter so Cannondale went
> > smaller in response. Anybody remember the largest diameter
> > cannondales?
> >
>
> Be aware that while the fatness of a C'dale frame was freaky-looking
> back then, now it's just not all that unusual to the eye.
>

Yep, compared to all the skinny steel tubed bikes of the time the C'dales
looked absolutely bloated.

Greg

 

[SYJ]

The old 3.0 frames with the cantilevered dropouts were pretty girthy
all around. Starting in the mid 90's, Cannondale abandoned that frame
design, and started their CAAD bikes. The CAAD 2 used a smaller
diameter (straight gauge?) downtube with moderately beefy stays. The
CAAD3 frames had the tapered downtubes that Chalo refers to (power
pyramid in Cannondalespeak), and possibly slightly smaller stays
(compared to the '2).

Compared to my old (late 80's - similar to the C'Dale Crit roadies of
the same era) Cannondale MTB, the downtubes were larger but the stays
smaller diameter (and far flexier - I could stand on the stays of the
MTB frame while it was laying on it's side w/o a rear hub, and barely
bend 'em).

Starting with the CAAD 4 frames, Cannondale kept the power pyramid
downtube and started putting S-bends into the stays (and their diameter
got even smaller).

SYJ


Chalo wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
> > I'm looking for a cannondale frame/fork for an art project and I would
> > prefer the year of the largest tubing. I remember it was about that
> > time the UCI declared a limit on tubing diameter so Cannondale went
> > smaller in response. Anybody remember the largest diameter
> > cannondales?
> >
> > PS, I'm looking for a conventional diamond frame design, not any of the
> > mtb suspension bikes.
>
> Sometime in the early '90s, Cannondale's 2" straight-gauge downtubes
> began to give way to conical downtubes that taper from about 2.25" at
> the BB to about 1.625" at the head tube. Along with this change, the
> stays got skinnier. The changeover began with the racing-type bikes;
> touring bikes maintained the old frame style for a few years more. To
> my knowledge, some of the MTBs kept the 2" downtubes all along, but
> they started getting thinner stays about 1990.
>
> Right about 1989, all Canondales had 2" downtubes and big fat rear
> stays. Before that they had thinner downtubes, and much after that,
> they all lost girth in the stays.
>
> Be aware that while the fatness of a C'dale frame was freaky-looking
> back then, now it's just not all that unusual to the eye.
>
> Chalo Colina

 

[Chalo]

SYJ wrote:
> The old 3.0 frames with the cantilevered dropouts were pretty girthy
> all around.

That was the first generation that moved away from their previous big
stays, though.

> Starting in the mid 90's, Cannondale abandoned that frame
> design, and started their CAAD bikes.

There was a 2.8 road bike series in between.

Chalo

 

[[email protected]]

[email protected] wrote:
> I'm looking for a cannondale frame/fork for an art project and I would
> prefer the year of the largest tubing. I remember it was about that
> time the UCI declared a limit on tubing diameter so Cannondale went
> smaller in response. Anybody remember the largest diameter
> cannondales?

For a data point, my 1986 touring 'Dale has a 1.75" down tube.

- Frank Krygowski

 

[Phil, Squid-in-Training]

[email protected] wrote:
> I'm looking for a cannondale frame/fork for an art project and I would
> prefer the year of the largest tubing. I remember it was about that
> time the UCI declared a limit on tubing diameter so Cannondale went
> smaller in response. Anybody remember the largest diameter
> cannondales?
>
> PS, I'm looking for a conventional diamond frame design, not any of
> the mtb suspension bikes.
>
> Rick

I don't know about you guys, but the Super V takes the cake for me:
http://community.webshots.com/photo/66240678/1066207101038509881ySpqgF

--
Phil, Squid-in-Training

 

[Johnny Sunset]

Phil, Squid-in-Training wrote:
>
> I don't know about you guys, but the Super V takes the cake for me:
> http://community.webshots.com/photo/66240678/1066207101038509881ySpqgF

It is not a Cannondale (duh) but the Thebis trike has to have one of
the largest diameter tubes (magnesium alloy) ever used in a human
powered vehicle.

See <http://www.jggrafx.com/thomsstuff/thebis-full-rt.jpg>. And yes,
the Thebis handles as oddly as it looks.

--
Tom Sherman - Fox River Valley

 

[SYJ]

Chalo wrote:


>
> There was a 2.8 road bike series in between.
>
> Chalo

Doh! That's what I meant. The 3.0's were around prior to the 2.8s,
but I never had/sold one, and as such, don't know the relative size of
the pipes.

SYJ

 

[JeffWills]

Johnny Sunset wrote:
> Phil, Squid-in-Training wrote:
> >
> > I don't know about you guys, but the Super V takes the cake for me:
> > http://community.webshots.com/photo/66240678/1066207101038509881ySpqgF
>
> It is not a Cannondale (duh) but the Thebis trike has to have one of
> the largest diameter tubes (magnesium alloy) ever used in a human
> powered vehicle.
>
> See <http://www.jggrafx.com/thomsstuff/thebis-full-rt.jpg>. And yes,
> the Thebis handles as oddly as it looks.
>
> --
> Tom Sherman - Fox River Valley

Tom- was it any larger than the Trek R200?
http://www.bicycleman.com/recumbents/recumbent-manufacturers-out-of-business/trek/trek.htm

Jeff

 

[Johnny Sunset]

JeffWills wrote:
> Johnny Sunset wrote:
> > Phil, Squid-in-Training wrote:
> > >
> > > I don't know about you guys, but the Super V takes the cake for me:
> > > http://community.webshots.com/photo/66240678/1066207101038509881ySpqgF
> >
> > It is not a Cannondale (duh) but the Thebis trike has to have one of
> > the largest diameter tubes (magnesium alloy) ever used in a human
> > powered vehicle.
> >
> > See <http://www.jggrafx.com/thomsstuff/thebis-full-rt.jpg>. And yes,
> > the Thebis handles as oddly as it looks.
> >
> > --
> > Tom Sherman - Fox River Valley
>
> Tom- was it any larger than the Trek R200?
> http://www.bicycleman.com/recumbents/recumbent-manufacturers-out-of-business/trek/trek.htm

I am working from memory, but the main tube on the R200 is about 3
inches/~7½ cm in diameter while the main tube on the Thebis is at
least 4 inches~10 cm in diameter.

--
Tom Sherman - Fox River Valley

 

[Colin Campbell]

[email protected] wrote:

>I'm looking for a cannondale frame/fork for an art project and I would
>prefer the year of the largest tubing. I remember it was about that
>time the UCI declared a limit on tubing diameter so Cannondale went
>smaller in response. Anybody remember the largest diameter
>cannondales?
>
>PS, I'm looking for a conventional diamond frame design, not any of the
>mtb suspension bikes.
>
>Rick
>
>
>
I don't know about the fattest, but my Cannondale track frame has pretty
fat tubes.

There was a run of them made over about a 4 - 5 year period, probably
ending before 2000.