Having owned every Cannondale road model from Caad, Six13, Supersix and the Evo and not wanting to go to disc brakes I am gutted they aren't bringing the rim brake option in the better carbon only a lower grade.

It's great the Cannodale is making strides in the aero field. But, it wasn't just the Trek Madone that they didn't test against. They didn't test against the Cervelo S5, the BMC Time Machine and the Specialized Venge, either. I would have rather seen those bikes in the test.

As I mentioned in an earlier post, the Supersix is their classic/climbing/traditional road bike, not their aero bike. So they were wanting to test against the same category of bikes from other manufacturers as that would be their main competition.

I imagine if someone had the tools that could overlay the data from this and the data from their system six (which they did test against the madone, S5, and venge) onto a graph and plot the points given that both data were presented as cda. But we don’t know for sure if the same sizes were used in both tests or what wheels were used. ie a quick comparison of the graphs shows the system six has a lower cda, but how much is the frame vs how much is the wheelset?

---

Matt

Tour magazine super bike test Venge>Madone
Cannondale test Madone>Venge
whom should I believe?

Not sure I’ve seen that one. Same Venge and same Madone in the each? I believe the Madone in the Cannondale test was the previous version (the newer version with the disc brake option hadn’t been released yet) which I’ve think I read on here is actually faster than the new one. If Tour Mag tested the newer Madone, that could make sense as it would be:

Old Madone>Newest Venge>New Madone

But someone should fact check me on that

---

Matt

I'd love to see my CAAD12 on that graph!

I think I understand what you're saying Matt, just not the why. The prior bike was less aero, but they tested it against aero bikes. The new bike is more aero, so it's tested against less aero bikes? That seems incongruent to me. Saying that they see those bikes as the direct competition just seems like marketing to me or possibly admitting that they don't have anything to compete with the Madone, S5, Time Machine or Venge. That said, all of this is just quibbling over some relatively minor stuff. I've no doubt it's a great bike.

Just want to clarify to make sure we are on the same page, there are two different Cannondale bikes we are talking about.

SYSTEM six -> this is their aero bike which they tested against the aero bikes of other companies. It was released about a year ago and is brand new in the Cannondale lineup (is there were no previous versions)

SUPER six -> this is their traditional road bike which they tested against against the traditional bikes of other brands. Cannondale has had this bike in their lineup for a number of years and just done a major remodel of it

The new SUPER six is more aero than it used to be in previous generations but it is not as aero as the SYSTEM six

---

Matt

You would hope your own bike would win the tunnel test. There are lots of decisions a manufacture will make when setting up their wind tunnel protocol, there is not necessarily one right answer. Do you test with all the same wheels and tires? What if some are rim brakes and some are disk, still use same wheels? What if someone are designed for specific wheels, do you use those? Or do you use the wheels and tires they come with? What size are you going to use? Are you going to use a mannequin? Are you going to test with bottles? What bottles and cages will you use? None of these questions have a "right" answer and they will affect the results.

Of course a company should optimize for their protocol, which should result in them winning that protocol, because that is what they decided the optimum set up is. It doesn't mean that companies are cheating or not being honest, it just means they they made the optimal bike based on what they believe is the optimal set up. That is why it is so important that companies are up front with the details of the their testing, so that consumers can decide what the data actually means. One test showing Brand A having the lost drag and another showing Brand B winning does not mean one of the tests is wrong or has bad data, just different protocols.

Thanks, Matt. I was on the wrong page. Thanks for straightening me out.

Bike looks good but some interesting info from the cycling tips review

https://cyclingtips.com/...h-first-ride-review/

What’s up front matters more than what’s going on behind.

Of all the bikes tested, only the SuperSix Evo was equipped with an aero-focused bar-and-stem, and given that Cannondale quotes a 9.1W saving for that component alone — relative to a conventional non-aero setup — the claimed gaps close significantly

The new logo from the '80s? :)

---

"I'm thinking of a number between 1 and 10, and I don't know why!"

Except you can't "similarly equip" an SL6 Tarmac, R5, or Emonda with that stem/bar combo, because they can't take the brake lines into the headtube like the C-dale. Could you make them a little more aero with different bars and stems? Sure, but I don't think you're matching the SuperSix's cockpit slickness with lines still in the wind. As C-dale makes this stem/bar combo standard, at least on the higher end builds (UDi2/Force eTap and up), I have no beef with them taking the credit and claiming the advantage. As for the Roadmachine, I find that an odd choice as it's BMC's endurance bike. The true segment competitor would seem to be TeamMachine SLR01, which happens to have a similar bar/stem setup and head-tube brake line entry point. The wind tunnel results of that model must not have been as flattering for the new SuperSix.

---

"They're made of latex, not nitroglycerin"

Have you seen the commercials for the Supersix Evo during the TdF? The ad starts and you think they're advertising nutrition or something: the bikes look plain, the riders look plain (no logos). Just a generic bike and a generic rider...then they drop the text telling us it's a new Supersix Evo.

The bike is a yawner. (although I'm sure it's a blast to ride)

Not a comment on the bike, but on the hydraulic shifters. Does anyone else find the big hunk of a shifter ugly? I understand they need to put the brake fluid reservoir somewhere, but both SRAM and Shimano (no Di2 version) shifters just felt really bulky and ugly.

I love this bike, and I want it. But I still think it's ugly. Specifically, here are the points I think are ugly:

Agreed about the spacers. Giant Propel has similar spacers and their ugliness ruins the entire bike.

I don't know why, but this post gave me my best laugh of the day. In fact I'm still chuckling as I write this. I mean this as a compliment. Thank you.

Reviving this!

Did anyone had the opportunity to ride this new SS yet? Thinking about getting the simpler version with 105 + rim.

Picking up mine end of this week hopefully, as it is currently in the process of being build. Frame only build up, with components coming over from my Tarmac SL6. So that be an interesting comparison, as the SL6 was pretty dam good.

---

N+1
Strava

hah! before my time.

---

@floathammerholdon | @partners_in_tri

I have the 105 Disc upgraded to eTap 11 with Kysrium SL's. I like it, but I will admit the spacers are fugly; mines completely slammed so it looks hot af.

I was recently researching the Cervélo S5 and comparing it to the System Six (aero bike vs aero bike) and I realized that I had to really scrutinize the data and the test bike build spec to get the best understanding of how bikes really compare. For example, the S5 they used in the Super Six white paper was 1) not a new style 2019 model as it wasn’t available yet and 2) it had Enve bars and stem which are not the Cervélo aero bars and stem that would have been a. Better comparison. I’m not saying Cannondale did anything shady. they just compared it to a production bike. The newer wheels, aero handlebar system and the new frame design the S5 is actually an equal or slightly faster bike.

Something similar can be extrapolated from the Super Six Evo white paper. The different frame design, less aero tires, wheels, bars and stem were all contributors to the 30w improvement over the outgoing bike. Much of that could have come from the ancillary parts not the frame design itself.

I feel like there should be light road bikes and fast aero bikes and nothing in between. The in between bikes are lost and I don’t see the value proposition. It’s the “jack of all trades, master of none” analogy.

Anybody know what size stem and handlebar are stocked on the 51 and 54 sizes? I can't find the info anywhere