For reference these are the values for the prevous gen supersix. Interesting that it is quite a bit more aero but also quite a bit less stiff. In fact it looks like it's actually less stiff than gen 2 and closer to gen 1 Could going back to threaded bottom bracket account for loss of stiffness in the bottom bracket? and what about the fork and headtube areas? Definitely interesting results...alanyu wrote: ↑Thu May 18, 2023 4:06 pmThe good news is that SSE gen4 is pretty fast as 207 watts without monobar, which means putting on the monobar will make it as fast as some full-aero bike such as foil, but the bad news is that it comprises stiffness and comfort A LOT.
------------gen 4 vs gen 3-------
Stiffness: 90 vs 100 (headtube); 40 vs 52 (fork); 56 vs 72 (BB) (higher is better)
Comfort: 120 vs 76 (lower is better)
Edit: not sure about exact comfort (76?) on gen 3
Cannondale SuperSix Evo4
Moderator: robbosmans
Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓ Broad Selection ✓ Worldwide Delivery ✓
www.starbike.com
thinking about the design changes from previous generations:
- The bottom bracket area changed from pressfit (BB30 then PF30A) to Threaded (BSA). Would this cause it to be less stiff?
- The headset area changed to be slimmer and more aero than gen 3 (gen 2 and gen 1 were pretty much round). same question as above regarding stiffness...
- The fork is an interesting one, especially since the Gen 2 fork was so slim... Gen 4 fork has more material... wonder if the pizza shaped steerer in gen 4 has something to do with it.
- Are the R-SL 50 wheels so much harher/stiffer that the design required the frame to be less stiff? (in other words, Cannondale designed the bike as an entire system...)
Can someone post a screenshot from the Tour mag with the details on the SSE gen 4? (if it's allowed). The posted values for stiffness seem quite odd when compared with previous generations. It doesn't appear to make sense that the stiffness values for gen 4 (a disk brake bike) are worse than gen2 and close to gen 1 (both rim brake). Conventional wisdom would say that the expected values for stiffness would be much closer to the gen 3 version.
- The bottom bracket area changed from pressfit (BB30 then PF30A) to Threaded (BSA). Would this cause it to be less stiff?
- The headset area changed to be slimmer and more aero than gen 3 (gen 2 and gen 1 were pretty much round). same question as above regarding stiffness...
- The fork is an interesting one, especially since the Gen 2 fork was so slim... Gen 4 fork has more material... wonder if the pizza shaped steerer in gen 4 has something to do with it.
- Are the R-SL 50 wheels so much harher/stiffer that the design required the frame to be less stiff? (in other words, Cannondale designed the bike as an entire system...)
Can someone post a screenshot from the Tour mag with the details on the SSE gen 4? (if it's allowed). The posted values for stiffness seem quite odd when compared with previous generations. It doesn't appear to make sense that the stiffness values for gen 4 (a disk brake bike) are worse than gen2 and close to gen 1 (both rim brake). Conventional wisdom would say that the expected values for stiffness would be much closer to the gen 3 version.
Last edited by omarcastz on Fri May 19, 2023 6:07 am, edited 5 times in total.
-
- Posts: 12458
- Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2017 12:02 pm
I also wonder how much small differences in stiffness translate to performance for not-so-young-and-strong enthusiast-level riders. If one's power meter rarely (if ever) shows numbers higher than 800W, would one ever notice? Whereas I would think the aero benefits would be tangible even if one is not racing at 45 km/hr.
It’s like aero, it is always there but significant out of the saddle (more linked to biomechanics gesture than losses inside the frame). At 300w it has been measured quite clearly by some brands, but if you don’t race the biggest impact will be on how reactive the frame is and how pleasant it is to ride with.rayrick wrote:I also wonder how much small differences in stiffness translate to performance for not-so-young-and-strong enthusiast-level riders. If one's power meter rarely (if ever) shows numbers higher than 800W, would one ever notice? Whereas I would think the aero benefits would be tangible even if one is not racing at 45 km/hr.
Yet very interested to test ride it.
Well, not even Cannondale themself.
Dum spiro spero
my bike: viewtopic.php?f=10&t=130302
my bike: viewtopic.php?f=10&t=130302
exactly the same for Specialized, Cervelo, Giant and a few other big box brands regarding factory builds. Rightly or wrongly this is a huge expense to have to spend additional funds to go with a narrower bar that suits the buyers preference. The other annoyance is actually finding the size you prefer if you want the branded bar that normally comes with the build. I'm not a Factor fan but they have the best formula with the ability to choose stem and bar as well as seatpost.
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
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
I ride 54 and use a 38cm wide bar. Honestly, according to my shoulders (don't remember the exact name of the bones where measures are taken), I should be on a 37cm. Going to a 40cm now seems propestorous and not because of aeroness. It's just really xondortable for me. Putting me in a 42cm would just be stupid. In conclusion, any full build is immediately a bad deal in my books.
-
- Posts: 654
- Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2020 3:46 pm
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
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
Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓ Broad Selection ✓ Worldwide Delivery ✓
www.starbike.com