# Cannondale CAAD 5 SAECO



## LyncStar (May 1, 2005)

I'm new to the group and road biking in general. I bought a slightly used Cannondale CAAD 5 Saeco. Wondering the general impressions on this bike. It is equipped with Dura-Ace components. has a 12-23 rear cassette and 53/39 front crank. The wheels are Campy Protons. I live in Colorado so am thinking of either going with a 12-27 cassette or a 50/34 FSA compact crank. Any thoughts on this? Also I paid $950 for the bike. Did I get a good deal?


----------



## Bill70J (Sep 23, 2004)

LyncStar said:


> I'm new to the group and road biking in general. I bought a slightly used Cannondale CAAD 5 Saeco. Wondering the general impressions on this bike. It is equipped with Dura-Ace components. has a 12-23 rear cassette and 53/39 front crank. The wheels are Campy Protons. I live in Colorado so am thinking of either going with a 12-27 cassette or a 50/34 FSA compact crank. Any thoughts on this? Also I paid $950 for the bike. Did I get a good deal?


I've got a 2002 CAAD5 with DA9 components and Campy Protons. I love the bike. It's light, stiff, and responsive, plus the components are first rate. It is a great climber. We bought it in 2002 for $2250, and to this day believe it was a good deal. IMO, if the bike you've got is 100% DA and lightly used, then the $950 you paid was probably a good deal.

If you're looking to do some serious climbing and don't want to go the triple route, I would agree the 50/34 compact with an Ultegra 12/27 is the way to go. In fact, that's exactly what I've got on mine now. (50/34 FSA Carbon Pro Elite + 12/27 Ultegra) I would NOT go with a DA rear cassette. The Ti simply wears too fast, so unless you're a very serious weight weenie, I would get the DA cassette off of there and sell it- exchanging it for the Ultegra.

Also, I think the Protons are a very good wheelset for the money. They are very light and stiff, plus the price is right. FWIW, I put Ksyrium SL's on my new bike, and don't really see a huge benefit over the Protons.


----------



## LyncStar (May 1, 2005)

Bill70J said:


> I've got a 2002 CAAD5 with DA9 components and Campy Protons. I love the bike. It's light, stiff, and responsive, plus the components are first rate. It is a great climber. We bought it in 2002 for $2250, and to this day believe it was a good deal. IMO, if the bike you've got is 100% DA and lightly used, then the $950 you paid was probably a good deal.
> 
> If you're looking to do some serious climbing and don't want to go the triple route, I would agree the 50/34 compact with an Ultegra 12/27 is the way to go. In fact, that's exactly what I've got on mine now. (50/34 FSA Carbon Pro Elite + 12/27 Ultegra) I would NOT go with a DA rear cassette. The Ti simply wears too fast, so unless you're a very serious weight weenie, I would get the DA cassette off of there and sell it- exchanging it for the Ultegra.
> 
> Also, I think the Protons are a very good wheelset for the money. They are very light and stiff, plus the price is right. FWIW, I put Ksyrium SL's on my new bike, and don't really see a huge benefit over the Protons.



What about just going with the 12/27? it is currently a 12/23, and I really don't want to spend the cash on the 50/34.

Also, I misspoke the component set is Ultegra, not DA.


----------



## Bill70J (Sep 23, 2004)

*Big Benefit*



LyncStar said:


> What about just going with the 12/27? it is currently a 12/23, and I really don't want to spend the cash on the 50/34.
> 
> Also, I misspoke the component set is Ultegra, not DA.


You will gain a lot simply with the switch to the 27. For example, if you're moving up a steep grade at 8 MPH, your cadence with the 39/27 would be 70RPM, vs. 60 for the 39/23. At 10 MPH it would be 87RPM vs. 75. The downside is that you begin the double jump on the back cassette after 15 on the 27, vs. 16 on the 23. You also have triple jumps on the 27 (21/24/27) vs. doubles on the 23 (17/19/21/23). (This assumes you've got a 9 speed train.)

Also, the switch to the 27 on back is quite straightforward. No change in chain length and just one change to RD settings - an increase in tension on the B screw to get the pulley off the 27 cog. (If you go with a new 12/27, you may want to get a new chain to go along with it, especially if there is wear in the existing chain, and/or evidence of wear in the 12/23 cogs.)

FWIW, I have the 53/39-25 (10 speed) on one bike and a compact 50/34-27 (9 speed) on the other. The second bike is far more versatile, allowing for very steep climbs at reasonable cadence -- without giving up much (that I need) on the front end. And the big jumps on the back cassette don't bother me much, especially considering what other things are on your mind when climbing. (Cadence for the 34/27 at 8 MPH is 80RPM.)


----------



## divve (May 3, 2002)

..if you're moving at 8mph just walk.


----------



## Bill70J (Sep 23, 2004)

*Huh?*



divve said:


> ..if you're moving at 8mph just walk.


You ever done a serious climb before, or are you a flatlander?


----------



## MountainGoat (Oct 7, 2005)

I just switched back to a 53/39 after almost a year on a 50/34. I switched my cassette from an 11-23 to a 12-25 to help on the climbs. I had an FSA compact and I had trouble with friction in the crankset, and after FSA sent a new bottom bracket the problem persisted so I switched back to my Campy Centaur 53/39. The FSA compact was very light, and is very beneficial to have on steep climbs, but, I like the smoothness of the Centaur v. the FSA, and I like the closer ratio on the Centaur better. As for the 27, I think that is a good idea if you have steep climbs in your area. If it's too small, you can always shift up.


----------



## LyncStar (May 1, 2005)

MountainGoat said:


> I just switched back to a 53/39 after almost a year on a 50/34. I switched my cassette from an 11-23 to a 12-25 to help on the climbs. I had an FSA compact and I had trouble with friction in the crankset, and after FSA sent a new bottom bracket the problem persisted so I switched back to my Campy Centaur 53/39. The FSA compact was very light, and is very beneficial to have on steep climbs, but, I like the smoothness of the Centaur v. the FSA, and I like the closer ratio on the Centaur better. As for the 27, I think that is a good idea if you have steep climbs in your area. If it's too small, you can always shift up.


I've been using a Ritchey compact crank and run 12/27 in the rear. It has worked really well for me. Out here in the Front Range of Colorado we have a couple of climbs that I like to do that have grades that hit 15% for decent stretches. Believe me it is nice to have that extra spin!! I know this is heresy, but when I get a new bike (probably a couple of years), I'm seriously going to consider going with a triple.


----------



## MountainGoat (Oct 7, 2005)

I don't blame you. I live in northwest Arkansas, and we have some climbs that are that steep (just not as long I'm sure). I did not have good luck with the FSA compact, but I would recommend a compact (another brand) over a triple. I had a triple on my first two bikes, and I had shifting issues with the triples, and with a triple you have a great deal of gear overlap. I would definitely recommend a compact versus a triple. I became a much better climber with it. And, it will be lighter. If you look at the gear rollout chart available on the internet (Sheldon Brown's site), you will see that when you mate the 50/34 to a 11-23 cassette, you actually get a wider gear ratio that if you were using a 53/39, and a 12-25 cassette. I just didn't like the large gap between the 50 and 34 up front, and I was fed up with FSA. Also, I did not invest in a new front derailleur, and there are front derailleurs that are being manufactured especially for compact cranks to handle the big jump from big to little chainring. Also, I believe the small chainring on most triples is a 30, so the 34 will be very close, and if you still wanted a smaller gear with the compact, you could use a 12-25 with the compact. I would highly recommend the compact-just not an FSA compact.


----------

