Am I the only one who thinks the 2004 Cannondale triathlon models 5000 and 2000 look like ass with that ugly seat tube? That has to be one of the most unaesthetic me-too ploys I’ve seen in a while. I’m certainly not anti-aero but some of the stuff people are doing in the name of aero just doesn’t make sense. Nice paint jobs. . . U.G.L.Y.-ass frames!
you aren’t alone.
What the @#$% is that all about? Did I piss in your Wheaties or something? Are you a Cannondale employee? I’m a fan of Cannondale, but I think they went way wrong with their tri-bikes this year.
Milk. Definitely milk.
.
Hey, actually looks GOOOOD to me…
I actaully thought they looked sweet, especially the paint.
I don’t care what it looks like how does it ride?
Shad
IMO Cannondale is falling way behind in the triathlon/TT game. This bike could have been a home run if they simpley extended the seat tube and made it an aero extension like Trek, Litespeed, and Elite. The sweetest bike in the pipeline (I hope) is the Giant TT bike used in the Tour and in yesterday Vuelta ITT.
I agree. Cannondale doesn’t get it. I have a CAAD4 “aero” and the new seat tube is just an extension of the same “we can’t or don’t care to make a real aero tube so we’ll throw this out there and see if any triathletes are dumb enough to bite” attitude. Their tubes are not aero. They’re just pointlessly heavy. I bet round tubes would be more aero, I know they’d be lighter and they certainly wouldn’t look as dumb.
I’m not really ripping on cannondale. They make nice bikes and I still like my old CAAD4. I just don’t like that they got over on me when I was younger and dumber by selling their fat, heavy tubes as “aero” and selling a 74 degree seat angle as “multisport” geometry.
I agree that it’s pretty ugly. But I think it looks a hell of a lot better than the Trek Equinox and Madone. Cervelo has an ad where they talk about bikes being designed by marketing departments. This seems to be exactly what is happening at Trek and Cannondale.
According to bikesportmichigan.com, the Cannondale 2000, it the best tri-bike out there. Value/price/specs etc. Are the 2004 models different than the Cannondale 2000, 2003 Version. Check out the review at bikesportmichigan.com
I give Trek some credit for at least coming up with a legit aero frame, they could have scored a touchdown if they offered that frame with true tri geometry. It just seems like many of the big bike companies are going backwards when it comes to triathlon/TT frames; Specialized, Cannondale, ect. Does anyone remember the GT Vengence, what a sweet frame that was. Let’s just hope Giant releases their carbon TT frame to us mortals.
If Cannondale’s new carbon/AL mix tri bike actually rides like my Six13, it will be a winner.
god is that funny, good work
.
Me too, Jon…and I’m the asshole who started this thread in the first place…funny to read that opinion now…
thanks for the reminder that everyone is an ass some days.
IMO Cannondale is falling way behind in the triathlon/TT game. This bike could have been a home run if they simpley extended the seat tube and made it an aero extension like Trek, Litespeed, and Elite.
You’re kidding…they’re falling way behind? Is the bike slower because the top 4 inches of the seat tube are round? Give me a break -like anyone would be able to feel that difference.
It’s not all about aesthetics. I like the round seattube at the top, and the fact that there are probably fewer problems with regards to the seatpost/seattube interface…no creaking posts, no seized posts, and a tighter fit. Remember, aero posts in an aero tube very rarely fit as well as a round post in a round tube. And if your post/rube interface isn’t as secure as it can be, that’s precious energy that goes away in the form of friction.
I think the paint jobs look hot, up until this year, anyway. Paint job aside, it’s the frame that counts the most, and the finish and welds on Cannondale frames are immaculate. Up until 2002 they extended the aero seattube all the way up, but by understanding is that they went this way because they can get a stronger (and stiffer) weld mating round rubes. It’s all about performance, not look, and I think Faris proved that they’re fine. Remember, he also won on an Aluminum frame too. It’s all about frame quality, baby!
Dude, your replying to a 3 year old post. Anyways, the new six/13 TT bike is pretty cool, I just saw one in person the other day. Personally, I would pull off the TT bars and replace them with some standard drops; now you have a rival for the carbon Soloist.
Dave in VA
My six13 tri came in yesterday. I will pick it up mon. Good point on the drop bars thing. I was worried about spending the money on a tri specific bike, I never thought to use it as a road bike. I feel less guilty now.
Seems kinda ugly in my opinion. anyone else?