Cannondale SuperSix Evo4

Back by popular demand, the general all-things Road forum!

Moderator: robbosmans

rayrick
Posts: 43
Joined: Tue Apr 25, 2023 5:13 pm

by rayrick

Love to hear you're having a good experience with the new bike, LedZeppelin007! And I totally agree with your conclusion about the R-SL 50 wheels. Tour often tests the bikes with both the stock wheels and Zipp 404's, and the 404's are routinely (though not absolutely always) faster. But to get that very impressive 207W number with the Cannondale wheels, they've got to be pretty dang fast. Also interested to hear about your experience with the new Corsa Pro's. I definitely want to swap the stock 25's for 28's, and I've been debating Conti 5000 S TR's vs Corsa Pros.

by Weenie


Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓    Broad Selection ✓    Worldwide Delivery ✓

www.starbike.com



alanyu
Posts: 1503
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2019 1:10 pm

by alanyu

For anyone interested in tour stiffness protocal, this is what I can find.
1640838506937361.jpeg

wickedstealthy
Posts: 427
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2021 3:16 pm

by wickedstealthy

LedZeppelin007 wrote:
Sat May 20, 2023 12:55 am
I’m quite irritated with the wide bars on my bike.

Otherwise, it’s just a rocket ship.

I think the wind tunnel tests tell us that the R-SL 50 wheels are also rapid.

I ripped off a 42 mile tempo ride today, solo, with a majority 12mph headwind and 3000 feet of climbing, riding on the hoods at 265 watts (285 normalized, I weigh 85kg) with a 20mph average. This was also my first time trying the Corsa Pro tires which are extremely nice. I typically average 16-17 mph on hilly solo rides (granted I was in a hurry today and put in some extra effort that landed me solidly in Z3 instead of Z2). Rumbling along on the flats at 260ish watts in places of decent tarmac, I was at 23-24mph, a good couple of mph higher than usual.

It’s just a fast bike.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
How would you rate them against enve 4.5 ? I believe it was you who also has experience with those ?
I opted for a frame built and waiting now for the seatpost and momo bar coming in my size.
It seems here that there is an arrangement that normally the seatpost and Momo bar will first be available for lab71 frames sold before they will be publicly available I was told

Karvalo
Posts: 3442
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2018 6:40 pm

by Karvalo

wickedstealthy wrote:
Sat May 20, 2023 8:26 pm
How would you rate them against enve 4.5 ? I believe it was you who also has experience with those ?
I opted for a frame built and waiting now for the seatpost and momo bar coming in my size.
It seems here that there is an arrangement that normally the seatpost and Momo bar will first be available for lab71 frames sold before they will be publicly available I was told
The bars are reserved first for size swaps on Lab71 complete bikes. People getting Lab71 frames either need to build them with something else and/or wait for them to be publicly available.

Haven't heard anything about zero setback seatposts being reserved for swaps on either complete bikes or frames.

wickedstealthy
Posts: 427
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2021 3:16 pm

by wickedstealthy

Karvalo wrote:
Sun May 21, 2023 7:50 am
wickedstealthy wrote:
Sat May 20, 2023 8:26 pm
How would you rate them against enve 4.5 ? I believe it was you who also has experience with those ?
I opted for a frame built and waiting now for the seatpost and momo bar coming in my size.
It seems here that there is an arrangement that normally the seatpost and Momo bar will first be available for lab71 frames sold before they will be publicly available I was told
The bars are reserved first for size swaps on Lab71 complete bikes. People getting Lab71 frames either need to build them with something else and/or wait for them to be publicly available.

Haven't heard anything about zero setback seatposts being reserved for swaps on either complete bikes or frames.
Well. At least at the shop where I went they mentioned this. They talked to the distributor last week.
The full bike lab71 here was scheduled for 20/08 and they suddenly popped up two weeks ago while they where already available in the Asian part of the world. Clearly there was some rescheduling done.
Also on the full bike they allowed me to swap seatpost, handlebar and wheels without extra cost.
Will see how it turns out. Don't really mind anyway as I'm not building anything without a straight seatpost

User avatar
C36
Posts: 2471
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2017 3:24 am

by C36

Great on aero (nothing said what they used as bottles in the wind tunnel, Tour protocol claim 1x 750ml), the rest is disappointing as pointed out by Tour, the front end is really on the flexible side.

I found the evo3 quite dead compared to the evo2, really curious how the evo3 will feel. If I had to choose based on the available tests, I would pick the Propel over the Evo4. If looking for pure aero I would go for the cube (look twice the geometry that is a bit bizarre)

Image

Edit: looking back to the SSEvo1 Black inc (lighter and flexier version of the Evo1 HM), the Evo4 appears similar (quite flexier fork -18%, stiffer BB +12%) and far from the Evo2 for example (-15% on the HT, -26% on the fork, -19% on the BB) or Evo3 (-10%, -23%, -22%).

skinnybex
Posts: 256
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2021 4:07 pm

by skinnybex

C36 wrote:
Sun May 21, 2023 5:56 pm
Great on aero (nothing said what they used as bottles in the wind tunnel, Tour protocol claim 1x 750ml), the rest is disappointing as pointed out by Tour, the front end is really on the flexible side.

I found the evo3 quite dead compared to the evo2, really curious how the evo3 will feel. If I had to choose based on the available tests, I would pick the Propel over the Evo4. If looking for pure aero I would go for the cube (look twice the geometry that is a bit bizarre)

Image

Edit: looking back to the SSEvo1 Black inc (lighter and flexier version of the Evo1 HM), the Evo4 appears similar (quite flexier fork -18%, stiffer BB +12%) and far from the Evo2 for example (-15% on the HT, -26% on the fork, -19% on the BB) or Evo3 (-10%, -23%, -22%).
I must like wet noodle bikes because the Dogma F which I rode for 3 days and 400k of distance in Spain and the SSE4 which I bought and own both feel reactive to power input as well as not beating up my body since I find both bikes comfortable compared to others I've owned or ridden. My power profile isn't obviously Cat1-Pro Level but I'm a solid rider 4.2wpkg and good on longer endurance rides where I don't tend to fade but stay consistent and strong. This year EF have had a breakthrough with various riders upping their level in performance likely because the new bike has allowed noticable marginal gains that have made that 2-3% difference from the previous bike. Maybe if I was a Sprinter then my opinion would be different but since 80% of all road cyclist I know classify themselves as Sprinters but are below average going uphill or rolling terrain.
23’ Cervelo Soloist / 6.88kg - 1x Crit Bike
22' Cervelo R5 / 6.35kg - Climbing Bike
22' Cervelo Caledonia 5 / 7.55kg - Travel Bike
21' Cervelo Aspero / 8.06kg - Gravel Travel Bike
23' Cervelo Aspero 5 / 8.25kg - Gravel Race Bike

tmrace
Posts: 140
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2020 12:13 am

by tmrace

C36 wrote:
Sun May 21, 2023 5:56 pm
Great on aero (nothing said what they used as bottles in the wind tunnel, Tour protocol claim 1x 750ml), the rest is disappointing as pointed out by Tour, the front end is really on the flexible side.

I found the evo3 quite dead compared to the evo2, really curious how the evo3 will feel. If I had to choose based on the available tests, I would pick the Propel over the Evo4. If looking for pure aero I would go for the cube (look twice the geometry that is a bit bizarre)

Image

Edit: looking back to the SSEvo1 Black inc (lighter and flexier version of the Evo1 HM), the Evo4 appears similar (quite flexier fork -18%, stiffer BB +12%) and far from the Evo2 for example (-15% on the HT, -26% on the fork, -19% on the BB) or Evo3 (-10%, -23%, -22%).
Out of curiosity since Cannondale claims similar stiffness levels to the Evo3 could the stiffness claims be based on the Lab71 version which uses higher grade carbon fibers?

Which could mean the hi-mod tested by Tour mag would measure less stiff with the slightly lower grade carbon layup?

Or does that not matter at all?

User avatar
C36
Posts: 2471
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2017 3:24 am

by C36

tmrace wrote:
C36 wrote:
Sun May 21, 2023 5:56 pm
Great on aero (nothing said what they used as bottles in the wind tunnel, Tour protocol claim 1x 750ml), the rest is disappointing as pointed out by Tour, the front end is really on the flexible side.

I found the evo3 quite dead compared to the evo2, really curious how the evo3 will feel. If I had to choose based on the available tests, I would pick the Propel over the Evo4. If looking for pure aero I would go for the cube (look twice the geometry that is a bit bizarre)

Image

Edit: looking back to the SSEvo1 Black inc (lighter and flexier version of the Evo1 HM), the Evo4 appears similar (quite flexier fork -18%, stiffer BB +12%) and far from the Evo2 for example (-15% on the HT, -26% on the fork, -19% on the BB) or Evo3 (-10%, -23%, -22%).
Out of curiosity since Cannondale claims similar stiffness levels to the Evo3 could the stiffness claims be based on the Lab71 version which uses higher grade carbon fibers?

Which could mean the hi-mod tested by Tour mag would measure less stiff with the slightly lower grade carbon layup?

Or does that not matter at all?
No idea but it would be interesting to see the difference.
They previously compared different frame grade for the aeroad, the tcr, a Lapierre (aircorde?), sl6 and 7 and… it depends. Some are stiffer and a bit lighter, some are just lighter, some flexier and lighter.

I am a still surprised those numbers came so low. The delta shaped pivot is quite narrow and seems obvious the lateral stiffness would drop but 10% heavier and 25% flexier is a questionable performance.

LedZeppelin007
Posts: 654
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2020 3:46 pm

by LedZeppelin007

wickedstealthy wrote:
LedZeppelin007 wrote:
Sat May 20, 2023 12:55 am
I’m quite irritated with the wide bars on my bike.

Otherwise, it’s just a rocket ship.

I think the wind tunnel tests tell us that the R-SL 50 wheels are also rapid.

I ripped off a 42 mile tempo ride today, solo, with a majority 12mph headwind and 3000 feet of climbing, riding on the hoods at 265 watts (285 normalized, I weigh 85kg) with a 20mph average. This was also my first time trying the Corsa Pro tires which are extremely nice. I typically average 16-17 mph on hilly solo rides (granted I was in a hurry today and put in some extra effort that landed me solidly in Z3 instead of Z2). Rumbling along on the flats at 260ish watts in places of decent tarmac, I was at 23-24mph, a good couple of mph higher than usual.

It’s just a fast bike.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
How would you rate them against enve 4.5 ? I believe it was you who also has experience with those ?
I opted for a frame built and waiting now for the seatpost and momo bar coming in my size.
It seems here that there is an arrangement that normally the seatpost and Momo bar will first be available for lab71 frames sold before they will be publicly available I was told
I don’t have a ton of experience with the R-SL 50s as I’m trying to sell them.

However, my initial impressions are that the are indeed very aero and surprisingly stiff given that the front wheel only has 20 spokes.

Seem very strong. Weight is not amazing, but they don’t feel too heavy when riding. They are good in the wind.

I think the Enves are more aero, they are lighter, and I like that they’re hookless. They have a great balance between comfort and stiffness. They make a very loud whooshing noise that I love. Probably slightly better than the R-SLs in the wind. I think Enve’s hubs are great, but I do like that the R-SLs have 240s. I also feel like Enve has just squeezed every drop of performance out of the 4.5s and they’ve always seemed a bit brittle to me. If you bump into anything they will definitely scratch. The layup is pretty thin in parts. I think their QC is lacking sometimes and I HATE having to tape my own rims. I can do a functional job, but I suck at it. I also dislike that they don’t drill a small hole in the rim to protect against a poor tape job, instead relying on that proprietary valve stem lock.

The R-SLs are solid. I don’t know if they belong on a $15,000 bike, but I also wouldn’t be surprised if we see wind tunnel data that shows it spanks most or all 50mm deep wheels (not counting the 4.5s or the Rapide CLXs).

TLDR: the R-SL 50s are solid and feel like a very good all-around 50mm wheel. The Enves are a bit brittle with questionable QC, but feel like you’ve fit TT wheels to your road bike with none of the downsides.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

TLN
Posts: 630
Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2017 4:50 pm

by TLN

LedZeppelin007 wrote:
Mon May 22, 2023 12:17 am
I don’t have a ton of experience with the R-SL 50s as I’m trying to sell them.

However, my initial impressions are that the are indeed very aero and surprisingly stiff given that the front wheel only has 20 spokes.

Seem very strong. Weight is not amazing, but they don’t feel too heavy when riding. They are good in the wind.

I think the Enves are more aero, they are lighter, and I like that they’re hookless. They have a great balance between comfort and stiffness. They make a very loud whooshing noise that I love. Probably slightly better than the R-SLs in the wind. I think Enve’s hubs are great, but I do like that the R-SLs have 240s. I also feel like Enve has just squeezed every drop of performance out of the 4.5s and they’ve always seemed a bit brittle to me. If you bump into anything they will definitely scratch. The layup is pretty thin in parts. I think their QC is lacking sometimes and I HATE having to tape my own rims. I can do a functional job, but I suck at it. I also dislike that they don’t drill a small hole in the rim to protect against a poor tape job, instead relying on that proprietary valve stem lock.

The R-SLs are solid. I don’t know if they belong on a $15,000 bike, but I also wouldn’t be surprised if we see wind tunnel data that shows it spanks most or all 50mm deep wheels (not counting the 4.5s or the Rapide CLXs).

TLDR: the R-SL 50s are solid and feel like a very good all-around 50mm wheel. The Enves are a bit brittle with questionable QC, but feel like you’ve fit TT wheels to your road bike with none of the downsides.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Do you happen to know if RSL50 comes with DT Swiss 240 Ratched or newer Ratchet EXP Hub? Anf if it's 54t or 36t? UPD: found your post, it's EXP
Those drivers might be compatible, but ratchet systems is slighyly differente between regular and EXP hubs.
I will have my hands on set of R-SL50 soon, would be great if I can swap cassetes with ease.
His: Orbea Orca OMX
Hers: Cannondale Synapse HM Disc

wickedstealthy
Posts: 427
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2021 3:16 pm

by wickedstealthy

LedZeppelin007 wrote:
Mon May 22, 2023 12:17 am
wickedstealthy wrote:
LedZeppelin007 wrote:
Sat May 20, 2023 12:55 am
I’m quite irritated with the wide bars on my bike.

Otherwise, it’s just a rocket ship.

I think the wind tunnel tests tell us that the R-SL 50 wheels are also rapid.

I ripped off a 42 mile tempo ride today, solo, with a majority 12mph headwind and 3000 feet of climbing, riding on the hoods at 265 watts (285 normalized, I weigh 85kg) with a 20mph average. This was also my first time trying the Corsa Pro tires which are extremely nice. I typically average 16-17 mph on hilly solo rides (granted I was in a hurry today and put in some extra effort that landed me solidly in Z3 instead of Z2). Rumbling along on the flats at 260ish watts in places of decent tarmac, I was at 23-24mph, a good couple of mph higher than usual.

It’s just a fast bike.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
How would you rate them against enve 4.5 ? I believe it was you who also has experience with those ?
I opted for a frame built and waiting now for the seatpost and momo bar coming in my size.
It seems here that there is an arrangement that normally the seatpost and Momo bar will first be available for lab71 frames sold before they will be publicly available I was told
I don’t have a ton of experience with the R-SL 50s as I’m trying to sell them.

However, my initial impressions are that the are indeed very aero and surprisingly stiff given that the front wheel only has 20 spokes.

Seem very strong. Weight is not amazing, but they don’t feel too heavy when riding. They are good in the wind.

I think the Enves are more aero, they are lighter, and I like that they’re hookless. They have a great balance between comfort and stiffness. They make a very loud whooshing noise that I love. Probably slightly better than the R-SLs in the wind. I think Enve’s hubs are great, but I do like that the R-SLs have 240s. I also feel like Enve has just squeezed every drop of performance out of the 4.5s and they’ve always seemed a bit brittle to me. If you bump into anything they will definitely scratch. The layup is pretty thin in parts. I think their QC is lacking sometimes and I HATE having to tape my own rims. I can do a functional job, but I suck at it. I also dislike that they don’t drill a small hole in the rim to protect against a poor tape job, instead relying on that proprietary valve stem lock.

The R-SLs are solid. I don’t know if they belong on a $15,000 bike, but I also wouldn’t be surprised if we see wind tunnel data that shows it spanks most or all 50mm deep wheels (not counting the 4.5s or the Rapide CLXs).

TLDR: the R-SL 50s are solid and feel like a very good all-around 50mm wheel. The Enves are a bit brittle with questionable QC, but feel like you’ve fit TT wheels to your road bike with none of the downsides.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Nice write up. I would anyway lace up the ENVEs with tactic hubs as I really like them. Insanely loud which I like :) I dont have to use a bell :D I ride currently some 56mm Dukes 23iw/29.4 outer and they have that same whoosh sound (pretty loud). They are good in heavy wind I discovered lately. If they would be 32mm wide I wouldnt hesistate as they are bomb proof, rated at 120kg and dont need anything fancy to be run tubeless. Looks are 100% ... and I saw that the new Fulcrums look almost identical (same IW and same OW and same shiny satin finish) The issue is that most tires 28mm will likely blow up beyond 29.4mm. Im currently running pirellis 26mm and they fit awesome.
I can get a very good deal on the tactic hubs and enve rims too.
What holds me back is a bit the limited tire possibilities or at least the disclaimer and the fact that they somehow are a bit lacking in QC.

User avatar
C36
Posts: 2471
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2017 3:24 am

by C36

skinnybex wrote:
Sun May 21, 2023 10:52 pm
I must like wet noodle bikes because the Dogma F which I rode for 3 days and 400k of distance in Spain and the SSE4 which I bought and own both feel reactive to power input as well as not beating up my body since I find both bikes comfortable compared to others I've owned or ridden. My power profile isn't obviously Cat1-Pro Level but I'm a solid rider 4.2wpkg and good on longer endurance rides where I don't tend to fade but stay consistent and strong. This year EF have had a breakthrough with various riders upping their level in performance likely because the new bike has allowed noticable marginal gains that have made that 2-3% difference from the previous bike. Maybe if I was a Sprinter then my opinion would be different but since 80% of all road cyclist I know classify themselves as Sprinters but are below average going uphill or rolling terrain.
I can't comment if you prefer flexier bikes, neither your riding style or how you compared your different bikes to avoid the different halos (new bike, completely different bike, what I spend money on), if you are happy with your bike, great.

The aero improvement is real, I rode with few Auber riders and they are really happy about the aero gain, some riders found a degradation on confort, only one of the 3 riders mentionned something on stiffness but remained vague.

skinnybex
Posts: 256
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2021 4:07 pm

by skinnybex

C36 wrote:
Mon May 22, 2023 11:38 am
skinnybex wrote:
Sun May 21, 2023 10:52 pm
I must like wet noodle bikes because the Dogma F which I rode for 3 days and 400k of distance in Spain and the SSE4 which I bought and own both feel reactive to power input as well as not beating up my body since I find both bikes comfortable compared to others I've owned or ridden. My power profile isn't obviously Cat1-Pro Level but I'm a solid rider 4.2wpkg and good on longer endurance rides where I don't tend to fade but stay consistent and strong. This year EF have had a breakthrough with various riders upping their level in performance likely because the new bike has allowed noticable marginal gains that have made that 2-3% difference from the previous bike. Maybe if I was a Sprinter then my opinion would be different but since 80% of all road cyclist I know classify themselves as Sprinters but are below average going uphill or rolling terrain.
I can't comment if you prefer flexier bikes, neither your riding style or how you compared your different bikes to avoid the different halos (new bike, completely different bike, what I spend money on), if you are happy with your bike, great.

The aero improvement is real, I rode with few Auber riders and they are really happy about the aero gain, some riders found a degradation on confort, only one of the 3 riders mentionned something on stiffness but remained vague.
In your opinion do you think higher stiffness values measured across the key areas of the frame are what make a great performig bike ? Do you think balance and compliance regarding frame layup equates to better performance ? Most of these companies likely tune the layup stiffness values for what they believe will apeal most to owners who invest in the brand. I'm only asking because you seem to have a excellent knowledge of design and engineering on these forums.
23’ Cervelo Soloist / 6.88kg - 1x Crit Bike
22' Cervelo R5 / 6.35kg - Climbing Bike
22' Cervelo Caledonia 5 / 7.55kg - Travel Bike
21' Cervelo Aspero / 8.06kg - Gravel Travel Bike
23' Cervelo Aspero 5 / 8.25kg - Gravel Race Bike

User avatar
C36
Posts: 2471
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2017 3:24 am

by C36

Does stiffness impact ride feel and measurable performance, yes, no doubt.
Is it a clear science? no if not we would have found the ideal bike ages ago, even within the same brand, they changed over time what their target is (I can share how BMC targets evolved over time, it had been published few years ago).
Do lab test tell all the story? no, some brands (usually not tested well) did claim that the Tour test is not significant. Now I had the chance to test ride a lot of the frames tested and to be able to build an educated guess reading lab tests. Now I don't pretent that what I like will suit everyone.
Finally, there is an halo risk around brands desining bikes to do well on Tour test, it happened a decade ago when the STW was their key metric and ended up with rubbish riding bikes, it happened on tires where Conti did oversized and hard sidewalls tires to do well on the test, deteriorating real life quality. But overall to tell a compelling story Tour test do work.

What surprises me on the Evo4 is that it drifts massively from what Cannondale did forever and drift from what Peter Denk did with the Evo1-2 and SL6-7 who have been the dominant bike of their generation from a ride quality standpoint. To lower stiffness compared to the System6 that really doesn't ride nicely was expected but dropping nearly 20% average versus the Evo2 and 3 is a strange move.

by Weenie


Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓    Broad Selection ✓    Worldwide Delivery ✓

www.starbike.com



Post Reply