# SuperSix Review by SystemSix owner



## s2ktaxi (Jul 11, 2006)

I finally got the opportunity to get a SuperSix to demo from my LBS. So, here are my observations. 

But first, I should share my rider profile since it probably affects perspective on a few aspects of bikes. I've been riding for about 18 months. Started with a CAAD4 R3000 DA, lost about 25 lbs and rewarded myself with a 2007 SystemSix Team 1 about 16 months ago. Currently I'm about 150 lbs and am about 5' 7". I ride a 50cm SystemSix. During the riding season, I ride about 150-250 miles/week on average.

The demo bike was a SuperSix Team 2. Two have comparisons as close as possible, I used my original pedals, seat post, seat and wheels (Ksyrium ES)/tires (Conti GP4000). 
I rode my SystemSix to the LBS, got the parts swapped over and rode away from the LBS about 30 mins later. Within about 50 yards out of the LBS, I could already tell the SuperSix felt noticeably different. I expected the ride to be noticeably more compliant with a slight loss of pedaling efficiency/directness. However, after three 15 mile rides so far with varying surfaces, hills, etc, I was surprised that my expectations were actually off!

Ride – over some grainy tarmac, the ride is slightly more compliant but not as noticeable as going from a 21mm to a 25mm tire.

Pedalling efficiency – this is where I was pleasantly surprised. The SuperSix (at least for me), is much more direct in putting down power. About as much difference as going from my CAAD4 to SystemSix. In the last 2 days, I’ve been feeling like I’ve suddenly gotten a bit stronger. Pedaling the SystemSix feels much more damped than the SuperSix. Taking a closer look at the bottom bracket area and the chain stays could explain why this is the case. The bottom bracket looks much more substantial than the SystemSix. Without the mechanical linkage of the SystemSix, I suspect the SuperSix’s rigidity between the bottom bracket and the headtube is probably substantially better – leading to the better pedaling feel.

SRAM vs DA – getting used to the SRAM shift-action was very easy – got used to it by the time I made the first turn. While this bike only had the SRAM Force, it shifted the rear and front more crisply though not as smoothly as the DA setup. That said, I’m not sure how much fine tuning could still be done to make the SRAM Force shift better. Also, using a DA rear cassette with a SRAM Force setup may not be as good as using a SRAM rear cassette.

Overall, I like the SuperSix despite being surprised against my original expectations. I think if I wanted to get a bike for a more compliant ride, the Synapse would be the way to go. However, I am very attracted to and impressed by the efficiency improvement and pedaling feel. The minor ride improvement is a bonus though not compelling enough on its own.

My decision: Ideally, I’d like to get the UK market version with SRAM Red but we can’t. The SuperSix Ultimate is a bit overkill besides the tubular tires not being practical for my purposes and a bit over my budget. So, I’m going to have my LBS build:

50cm SuperSix in WHITE! (originally, I was thinking Black/Silver but it's too close to the SystemSix)
Cannondale Si SL Crank (in black)
Control Tech Scored 99 Scandium Stem (I just realized the "99" is referring to the weight in grams)
SRAM Red Brakes, Shifters, RD, FD
ZIPP SL Handlebar
Fizik Arione CX Carbon w/Braided Rail
USE Cyclops seatpost
KMC SL chain
Mavic R-SYS wheels (for now)
XPEDO RF-S1R pedals - 160g/pair! (for now)


----------



## STARNUT (Jun 19, 2005)

where are you?

If you in the US there are few parts on there that will have you waiting for a bit. Manily the cranks and the bars.

For what its worth I'm building a very similar super.

Starnut


----------



## s2ktaxi (Jul 11, 2006)

I am aware of the wait - mine won't be complete till at least mid April...

I'm in WA. What I'm trying to do is figure out how I can get the frame trade-in price. Almost worth it to buy a $500 cannondale just to get the $750 discount


----------



## MaestroXC (Sep 15, 2005)

STARNUT said:


> where are you?
> 
> If you in the US there are few parts on there that will have you waiting for a bit. Manily the cranks and the bars.
> 
> ...


For yourself? And, I know this was asked over at WW, but did you end up getting a weight for a 58cm Super Six frame?


----------



## STARNUT (Jun 19, 2005)

yes sir for me  its still in the top secert phase. We just got the artwork back a few weeks ago. Custom baby! Think............new R3 :idea: 

1143.4 grams for a 58 (hanger and cage bolts only! no bearings or seatpost clamp) and 356.3 grams on an uncut fork.

Starnut


----------



## stwok (Mar 15, 2007)

s2ktaxi said:


> I am aware of the wait - mine won't be complete till at least mid April...


Post pictures when your finished!!

The Mavics are not very arodynamic, expensive and fragile. 

Have you ever considered a custom build?
Here's a link to a custom builder and a build example.

Velocity Aerohead rims
White Industries H2 hubs
SAPIM CX Ray bladed spokes 

1420 grams
$665.00


----------



## s2ktaxi (Jul 11, 2006)

STARNUT said:


> yes sir for me  its still in the top secert phase. We just got the artwork back a few weeks ago. Custom baby! Think............new R3 :idea:
> 
> 1143.4 grams for a 58 (hanger and cage bolts only! no bearings or seatpost clamp) and 356.3 grams on an uncut fork.
> 
> Starnut


Are you having Cannondale do the custom paint job? How elaborate is it? I was wondering about doing a "My Earth Dream" theme and having a partial picture of the earth overlayed on the rear third of the bike  but am not sure if it can be done.


----------



## s2ktaxi (Jul 11, 2006)

stwok said:


> Post pictures when your finished!!
> 
> The Mavics are not very arodynamic, expensive and fragile.
> 
> ...


Thanks for the suggestion - the price certainly looks tempting. Are you referring to the R-SYS being fragile or Mavics in general? I've had very good experience with my Ksyrium ES's staying true despite some major pothole hits and over 8000 miles. I'm not tied to the R-SYS and would have actually preferred a ZIPP 303 or 404 if they were lighter.


----------



## packeteer (Dec 29, 2007)

s2ktaxi said:


> I am aware of the wait - mine won't be complete till at least mid April...
> 
> I'm in WA. What I'm trying to do is figure out how I can get the frame trade-in price. Almost worth it to buy a $500 cannondale just to get the $750 discount


This is the reason they only allow the original owner to trade it in. If anyone could trade it in everyone would buy an old cannondale just to trade in.


----------



## stwok (Mar 15, 2007)

packeteer said:


> This is the reason they only allow the original owner to trade it in. If anyone could trade it in everyone would buy an old cannondale just to trade in.



The original owner of a Cannondale can use it in the Cannondale frame exchange program.
I traded/exchanged my 17 year old Black Lightening in on a new frame!!
$750.00 is the going rate on any one owner Cannondale frame.


----------



## stwok (Mar 15, 2007)

s2ktaxi said:


> Thanks for the suggestion - the price certainly looks tempting. Are you referring to the R-SYS being fragile or Mavics in general? I've had very good experience with my Ksyrium ES's staying true despite some major pothole hits and over 8000 miles. I'm not tied to the R-SYS and would have actually preferred a ZIPP 303 or 404 if they were lighter.


My bad ........... yes the R-SYS. I got that impression from several post on the Wheel and Tire forum. I own 2 sets of 2006/2007 SLs, one is a clincher and the other is tubular. Never had any problems!! My dream set of wheels is the Zipp 404 pave. Very expensive though. Probably go back to a custom build on my next set.


----------



## mikeyp123 (Mar 9, 2007)

that's interesting that your found the bottom bracket of the SuperSix stiffer than the SystemSix... the SystemSix being crazy stiff as it is. 

I have also be debating to go all carbon too. I currently ride a SystemSix. I've been eying the Look 595 these days. Although I'll probably put another season on the SystemSix. It's still a killer great bike.


----------



## s2ktaxi (Jul 11, 2006)

mikeyp123 said:


> that's interesting that your found the bottom bracket of the SuperSix stiffer than the SystemSix... the SystemSix being crazy stiff as it is.
> 
> I have also be debating to go all carbon too. I currently ride a SystemSix. I've been eying the Look 595 these days. Although I'll probably put another season on the SystemSix. It's still a killer great bike.


I've done a bit more research and have a hypothesis I am not yet able to prove. I compared the the Carbon Si cranks and realized that the Carbon Si crank on my System Six was the original 3 piece version which has narrower (by about 4-5mm) crank arms! The one on the SuperSix is the newer two piece (with a see through/hollow non-drive side spindle end). I'm not sure if that makes such a big difference. I'm trying to see if my LBS can get an exchange for me from Cannondale under the premise that my current Carbon crank arm is flexing more than it should.


----------



## mikeyp123 (Mar 9, 2007)

That could be it. I have the Hollowgram SI crank on my SystemSix, which I think only came on the team edition frames (last year).. I believe it's one of the stiffer cranks on the market. I don't really trust carbon cranks in the first place, too many recalls.


----------



## ipaul (Feb 16, 2004)

I've ridden both the carbon si and the aluminum si, and there was a noticeable amount of difference between the two. The aluminum si is the way to go.


----------



## zosocane (Aug 29, 2004)

Interesting observations. I have close to 2,500 on my 2008 SuperSix (I have the black Liguigas paintjob) and have ridden the SystemSix on a test ride over several miles. On the pedaling efficiency, I note that the SuperSix's new SI crankset (the aluminum one) has ceramic bearings (unlike the 2007 System Six model that I assume you own which would have steel bearings). Can that explain why you noticed more efficient pedaling? I felt that straight-away on my first ride of the SuperSix and attributed it to the ceramic bearings in the BB. But the SystemSix is still, IMO, slightly stiffer than the SuperSix.

I also note that the SuperSix's all-carbon bottom bracket had to be ridiculously oversized to match up to or exceed the all-aluminum bottom bracket of the SystemSix and Six13 so as to give the SuperSix rider that same "Cannondale feel" when putting the power down that one feels on the System and the 13. 

I've been delighted with the SuperSix and enjoy its mix of superb stiffness and relatively good compliance. I raced it last week where -- on a rather long downhill with Roubaix-like road conditions that the riders lap a few times -- the bike rattled substantially less than when I raced over that same horrible patch last year on the 13 and felt like I was manning a jack-hammer, waiting for the bike to pop under me (not a complaint on the Six13 per se, just making the point that the all-aluminum rear triangle of the 13 and the System are less forgiving than carbon, depending on road conditions).

I haven't gotten around to doing a meaningful review of the SuperSix on this board but stay tuned.

On the R-SYS, I borrowed a friend's pair in December and rode them for a week on my SuperSix in an effort to determine how badly I wanted them. Quick observations:

1. Light wheelset, no doubt. I think this is the only meaningful advantage of the R-SYS.
2. The carbon spokes left me worrying -- what happens if a piece of metal comes in at the wrong place at the wrong time? Total wheel failure? I think the carbon spoke conceptually is good but for day-to-day training it would make me a little nervous.
3. The R-SYS was definitely less comfortable than the Mavic Ksyrium SL, Mavic Cosmic Carbone Premium, and the Fulcrum Racing 1s.
4. The stiffness over the above-mentioned wheelsets was either the same or slightly better -- which might explain why it was less comfortable than those other wheelsets.
5. After riding them for a week, I went back to my regular wheelsets (the Cosmic Carbone or Fulcrum Racing 1) and felt I never should have turned my back on them. At the end of the day, I concluded it wasn't worth it to shell out $1,200 to shave off another 100-200 grams at the expense of some comfort.


----------



## s2ktaxi (Jul 11, 2006)

fornaca68 said:


> Interesting observations. I have close to 2,500 on my 2008 SuperSix (I have the black Liguigas paintjob) and have ridden the SystemSix on a test ride over several miles. On the pedaling efficiency, I note that the SuperSix's new SI crankset (the aluminum one) has ceramic bearings (unlike the 2007 System Six model that I assume you own which would have steel bearings). Can that explain why you noticed more efficient pedaling? I felt that straight-away on my first ride of the SuperSix and attributed it to the ceramic bearings in the BB. But the SystemSix is still, IMO, slightly stiffer than the SuperSix.
> 
> I also note that the SuperSix's all-carbon bottom bracket had to be ridiculously oversized to match up to or exceed the all-aluminum bottom bracket of the SystemSix and Six13 so as to give the SuperSix rider that same "Cannondale feel" when putting the power down that one feels on the System and the 13.
> 
> ...


I have ceramic bearings on my SystemSix whereas the SuperSix I rode had the regular bearings. Despite that, the power transfer was a lot more immediate on the SuperSix I rode. I am beginning to suspect that my SystemSix's carbon crank is flexing more than it should - I'm going to see if my LBS can do anything with Cannondale on this.

I noticed the same thing about the SuperSix's oversized bottom bracket. Hence my original thought was that contributed to the feeling of the SuperSix being more pedaling efficient than the SystemSix.

Thanks for the input on the R-SYS. I have an extra set of Ksyrium SL3 that I can use for the time being (which BTW are less stiff and a bit more comfortable than the Ksyrium ES/SL4). Since you mentioned Fulcrum Racing 1s - how do they compare with the Mavic Ksyrium SL/ES - durability or feel?


----------



## zosocane (Aug 29, 2004)

s2ktaxi said:


> Since you mentioned Fulcrum Racing 1s - how do they compare with the Mavic Ksyrium SL/ES - durability or feel?


The Fulcrum Racing 1s in my view are slightly stiffer than the Ksyrium SLs (never ridden the ESs), but they pick up a touch more road buzz than the SLs -- so you sacrifice a touch of comfort to gain a touch of stiffness. Having said that, the real advantage of the Fulcrum Racing 1s is that they have Campy hubs which spin very nicely. When you are holding the bike and just spin the front wheel, it takes an eternity for it to stop -- just seems to spin forever. 

For more on the R-SYS, check out this well-done review. If the link below doesn't take you straight to the R-SYS review, go to "Road" then it's the third video icon from the top, I believe. http://www.testrider.com/fly.aspx?layout=player&video=3


----------



## way2fast4u (Aug 29, 2005)

ok after reading this wonderful review, Is it safe to say that anyone 150 pounds and under will get the same affect on a supersix then the systemsix? and 150+ requires the systemsix?

Im on the verge of getting this super but not sure.. I currently have the system and love the hell out of it but being at 150 will i get the same feeling and effect on a super? thanks guys..


----------



## zosocane (Aug 29, 2004)

way2fast4u said:


> ok after reading this wonderful review, Is it safe to say that anyone 150 pounds and under will get the same affect on a supersix then the systemsix? and 150+ requires the systemsix?
> 
> Im on the verge of getting this super but not sure.. I currently have the system and love the hell out of it but being at 150 will i get the same feeling and effect on a super? thanks guys..


That's a good question. I would think the SystemSix is more suited for heavier, sprinter-type riders, but Danilo DiLuca (who is 5'6" or so and can't weigh more than 150 lbs) was terrorizing Italy at the Giro last May on a SystemSix. Then take a heavier sprinter-classics-type rider like Pippo Pozzato who weighs about 160 to 165 lbs and he favors the SuperSix. I just think it comes down to how badly do you want the slightly smoother ride that all carbon brings and are you willing to pay more coin for it.


----------



## way2fast4u (Aug 29, 2005)

fornaca68 said:


> That's a good question. I would think the SystemSix is more suited for heavier, sprinter-type riders, but Danilo DiLuca (who is 5'6" or so and can't weigh more than 150 lbs) was terrorizing Italy at the Giro last May on a SystemSix. Then take a heavier sprinter-classics-type rider like Pippo Pozzato who weighs about 160 to 165 lbs and he favors the SuperSix. I just think it comes down to how badly do you want the slightly smoother ride that all carbon brings and are you willing to pay more coin for it.


Yea this whole thing is confusing.. Like I said I have a system six right now, but come to find out I need a smaller size.. So If the super rides like the system as far as stiffnes for my weight why not upgrade.. I'm just scared its not going to be the same ride.. 

This is why I'm asking before i take that step..


----------



## zosocane (Aug 29, 2004)

way2fast4u said:


> Yea this whole thing is confusing.. Like I said I have a system six right now, but come to find out I need a smaller size.. So If the super rides like the system as far as stiffnes for my weight why not upgrade.. I'm just scared its not going to be the same ride..
> 
> This is why I'm asking before i take that step..


Can you get your LBS to let you borrow a SuperSix demo to put 5 to 10 miles on a test ride?


----------



## way2fast4u (Aug 29, 2005)

fornaca68 said:


> Can you get your LBS to let you borrow a SuperSix demo to put 5 to 10 miles on a test ride?



actually getting a team 50 built for me to get fitted on and i will try and to take it for a few miles and see..


----------



## woogie11 (Jul 16, 2006)

You're not going to notice a difference between ceramic bearings and non ceramic bearings, espeically on the SI's which use a very high end steel bearing set. The power savings is something like 15 watts per hour or so, they don't increase power they decrease drag. The SI SL's are way stiffer and almost 200 grams lighter than the carbon SI's. I own a super six and have demoed a System Six extensively; on paper the System Six is drastically stiffer, however, the Super Six does feel more efficient. I think it is an illusion from the way the frames are made. I believe because of the co-molding process that the "road feel" or "liveliness" of the System is greatly diminished. I feel the same way about most fully lugged carbon bikes, like the Madone or Colnago's, that they feel dead and unresponsive even if they are "stiff." I think the co-molding and lugging process of certain frames deadens the feel of these bikes, the lugs/co-molding acting almost like dampers . Even if the System Six's bottom bracket stiffness is higher, I think due to the co molding process it may not transfer power as well, it is a two piece design versus the one piece design of the Super Six chain-stays/bottom bracket...


----------



## STARNUT (Jun 19, 2005)

fornaca68 said:


> That's a good question. I would think the SystemSix is more suited for heavier, sprinter-type riders, but Danilo DiLuca (who is 5'6" or so and can't weigh more than 150 lbs) was terrorizing Italy at the Giro last May on a SystemSix. Then take a heavier sprinter-classics-type rider like Pippo Pozzato who weighs about 160 to 165 lbs and he favors the SuperSix. I just think it comes down to how badly do you want the slightly smoother ride that all carbon brings and are you willing to pay more coin for it.


Di Luca's size was not ready in time for the Giro. Nor was Solar's for the Tour. Di Luca is on a 50 if I recall and Solar is on a 60 or 63. Both are sizes that aren't sold as much as the 54/56 size.

Starnut


----------



## zosocane (Aug 29, 2004)

STARNUT said:


> Di Luca's size was not ready in time for the Giro. Nor was Solar's for the Tour. Di Luca is on a 50 if I recall and Solar is on a 60 or 63. Both are sizes that aren't sold as much as the 54/56 size.
> 
> Starnut


My point being that a relatively big rider like Pozzato went with the SuperSix when he could have stuck with the SystemSix; the smaller DiLuca rode on the SystemSix into August during the Tour of Poland when he could have ridden the SuperSix. So this illustrates that there's apparently no rhyme or reason as to size vis a vis the Super and System.


----------



## packeteer (Dec 29, 2007)

woogie11 said:


> You're not going to notice a difference between ceramic bearings and non ceramic bearings, espeically on the SI's which use a very high end steel bearing set. The power savings is something like 15 watts per hour or so, they don't increase power they decrease drag. The SI SL's are way stiffer and almost 200 grams lighter than the carbon SI's. I own a super six and have demoed a System Six extensively; on paper the System Six is drastically stiffer, however, the Super Six does feel more efficient. I think it is an illusion from the way the frames are made. I believe because of the co-molding process that the "road feel" or "liveliness" of the System is greatly diminished. I feel the same way about most fully lugged carbon bikes, like the Madone or Colnago's, that they feel dead and unresponsive even if they are "stiff." I think the co-molding and lugging process of certain frames deadens the feel of these bikes, the lugs/co-molding acting almost like dampers . Even if the System Six's bottom bracket stiffness is higher, I think due to the co molding process it may not transfer power as well, it is a two piece design versus the one piece design of the Super Six chain-stays/bottom bracket...



Watts per hour is not a measurement. I own a supersix and my friend bought a systemsix the same day i bought my bike. I have rode both and although the supersix is a nicer ride and is plenty responsive the systemsix is stiffer. I think if you are not a materials scientist you should not be guessing about which one is more efficient. Using laymen's terms and logic to try and decide which is better won't get you to the real answer.

For more the real answer is this easy. The supersix is a nicer frame all around. The efficiency of both frames are very close but the price is not. The pro's ride what their sponsors give them. They get some choice but there are plenty of people riding technically inferior bikes but still winning.

I bought the supersix but would not be dissapointed if i had bought a systemsix. Both are fine and you the rider cannot tell the different in efficiency.


----------



## woogie11 (Jul 16, 2006)

As for not being a materials scientist; isn't the point of these forums to have the consumers discuss their opinions and feelings on the products? The ceramic bearings decrease drag, increasing efficiency and saving power; 15 watts is what my rep told me the power savings is. Of course it won't be 15 watts all the time and for everybody but, they do save power. Cannondale spun up the SI SL's on machines measured drag with and without ceramic bearings and computed a power savings from that. Don't ask me how. I guess I should have been more articulate in phrasing my opinion on the System and the Super so; to break it down I would say even if the System is stiffer the Super feels more efficient. Peace.


----------



## packeteer (Dec 29, 2007)

The resistance in your cranks are based on your cadence. The higher the cadence the lower the resistance. The same is true with your hubs. Ceramic bearings are better for applications where the speed is low, therefore the resistance is high. I personally love my SI SL's on my supersix. They are very smooth and light.


----------



## jhenry4 (Feb 4, 2006)

*SI SL vs SI Carbon*

I must agree with the earlier post in that the SL's are significantly and noticeably stiffer than the Carbons. I noticed an immediate improvement in rigidity and power transfer when i upgraded my CAAD7 to SL's


----------



## mylesofsmyles (Mar 20, 2007)

FOR THE LOVE OF GOD...PLEASE DON'T BUY THAT STEM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! That is, without question, the flexiest stem I have ever seen. It is scary flexy. I felt it flex on hard climbs and sprints and, don't get me started on how it descends. Be smart...go buy a Thomson!


----------

