# Beware when buying a Cannondale Super Six EVO!



## bryin

I was thinking about Cannondale Super SixEVO with the new Red group... As I did some research I found out there are 3 grades of EVO frames. The grades of carbon get heavier as the bikes get less expensive. The Red model (not the Red Racing model) weighs 15.56lb in 56cm, which is pretty darn heavy for a bike with the new Red. My Cervelo R3 (3 years old) with Ultegra 6700 and Rolfs weighs 15.4 and the new Red is over a 1lb lighter thena Ultegra 6700 so the Cdale frame has to be 1000+ grams. Cdale is being prettty shady with this, the bikes are all listed on the same page on their site and all bear the same name. They should id the bikes with the lesser carbon with different names. This what all other manhfactures do... Trek, Specialized, Cervelo all make sure the frames with lesser carbon are easier to id. 

I found a real weight for the EVO Red at Infinite Cycles web site...


----------



## tpgrole

Cannondale's website does clearly identify the difference in frame construction.

SUPERSIX EVO CARBON vs. SUPERSIX EVO, BALLISTEC HI-MOD CARBON vs. SUPERSIX EVO, BALLISTEC NANO CARBON.

How is listing the composite variation under the specs considered shady?


----------



## CHL

The website is a bit confusing. If you look at the "Features" menu, Cannondale states that it uses Ballistec Carbon in all of the Super Six EVO bikes. However, if you look at the "Specs" menu for the individual models then you will find Super Six EVO Carbon, Ballistec Hi-Mod Carbon and Ballistec Nano Carbon. 

Is the Super Six Evo Carbon a grade of Ballistec Carbon or something different? All the marketing stuff that I have seen states that Cannondale constructs the Super Six Evo with Ballistec Carbon.

By the way, which Rolf Prima wheels did you have with your Cervelo? The Rolf Prima Elans are very light clinchers (1350gm - verified - I had a pair of these), far lighter than Mavik Ksyrium Equippes (1700-1800gm) that the Super Six EVO Red sports.


----------



## Toona

*My EVO*

Includes Look Keo pedals, bottle cages, and Hed Ardennes wheelset........


----------



## Cdale EVO Tom

Cannondale was more than a little deceptive, burying the frame construction details in the fine print.

If you wanted the Hi Mod EVO frame there was a whopping $2,000 price increase for the 2013 model year. I don't think the company wanted to draw attention to that.


----------



## Warpdatframe

You don't need it to be any lighter when you put race wheels on. The uci weight minimun is 15 lbs and you don't need this bike if you're not racing.


----------



## Jay Strongbow

tpgrole said:


> Cannondale's website does clearly identify the difference in frame construction.
> 
> SUPERSIX EVO CARBON vs. SUPERSIX EVO, BALLISTEC HI-MOD CARBON vs. SUPERSIX EVO, BALLISTEC NANO CARBON.
> 
> How is listing the composite variation under the specs considered shady?


They only sell the bikes in shops, not through their website, so what's listed there isn't relevent to what they are disclosing to buyers. Not calling different frames by different names is shady in my book.


----------



## bocksta

bryin said:


> I was thinking about Cannondale Super SixEVO with the new Red group... As I did some research I found out there are 3 grades of EVO frames. The grades of carbon get heavier as the bikes get less expensive. The Red model (not the Red Racing model) weighs 15.56lb in 56cm, which is pretty darn heavy for a bike with the new Red. My Cervelo R3 (3 years old) with Ultegra 6700 and Rolfs weighs 15.4 and the new Red is over a 1lb lighter thena Ultegra 6700 so the Cdale frame has to be 1000+ grams. Cdale is being prettty shady with this, the bikes are all listed on the same page on their site and all bear the same name. They should id the bikes with the lesser carbon with different names. This what all other manhfactures do... Trek, Specialized, Cervelo all make sure the frames with lesser carbon are easier to id.
> 
> I found a real weight for the EVO Red at Infinite Cycles web site...


The base red evo has a heavier wheel set (Mavic Equipe) and the crank is not the Sram Red crank (S951) . Just swapping out the wheel set for some Mavic ksyrium SL's and the crankset to the Sram red or Cannondale Hollowgram would get you well below the 15lb mark.


----------



## Camilo

bryin said:


> I was thinking about Cannondale Super SixEVO with the new Red group... As I did some research I found out there are 3 grades of EVO frames. The grades of carbon get heavier as the bikes get less expensive. The Red model (not the Red Racing model) weighs 15.56lb in 56cm, which is pretty darn heavy for a bike with the new Red. My Cervelo R3 (3 years old) with Ultegra 6700 and Rolfs weighs 15.4 and the new Red is over a 1lb lighter thena Ultegra 6700 so the Cdale frame has to be 1000+ grams. Cdale is being prettty shady with this, the bikes are all listed on the same page on their site and all bear the same name. They should id the bikes with the lesser carbon with different names. This what all other manhfactures do... Trek, Specialized, Cervelo all make sure the frames with lesser carbon are easier to id.
> 
> I found a real weight for the EVO Red at Infinite Cycles web site...


I'm not arguing about actual frame weight - they very well could be different. But how can you compare "whole bikes" (which is what you're doing... you're not really comparing frames) withouth knowing or telling us what wheels and tires are on the bikes in question. Even good quality wheels can have 1/2 to a full pound difference. Tires can be another 1/4 + pound. Then, things like seat post, stem, handlebars, saddle, can possibly add up to another 1/4 pound pretty easily.


So if you're complaining about the whole bike being heavy, you can't really blame it on the frame without knowing if those other things are the real reason for the difference.


----------



## eekase

Toona said:


> Includes Look Keo pedals, bottle cages, and Hed Ardennes wheelset........


Hey Toona....What size is your EVO?


----------



## tpgrole

Jay Strongbow said:


> They only sell the bikes in shops, not through their website, so what's listed there isn't relevent to what they are disclosing to buyers. Not calling different frames by different names is shady in my book.


The OP stated he was doing some research on the Cannondale website, so it is relevant to the original post. The source in question, the Cannondale website, does in fact state the frames use different carbon. Ballistec vs Ballistec Hi-Mod vs Ballistec Nano. 

If all three frames use the same mold, then IMO, its OK to call them the same name as long as the spec differences are listed, which they are.


----------



## cxwrench

Warpdatframe said:


> You don't need it to be any lighter when you put race wheels on. The uci weight minimun is 15 lbs and you don't need this bike if you're not racing.


well, that's what i call a definitive answer. Warpdatframe has spoken, and now we all know what's what. 
i don't have a UCI license, should i sell my Madone 6.9 that weighs under 14lbs? 

it is actually for sale, but just so i can get the new, lighter frame. i hope that's ok. and the UCI min weight is 6.8kg, which is a bit under 15.0lbs...just sayin.


----------



## carlislegeorge

Warpdatframe said:


> You don't need it to be any lighter when you put race wheels on. The uci weight minimun is 15 lbs and you don't need this bike if you're not racing.


am pretty sure nobody "needs" any bike at all...but my "wants" are mighty strong and light of weight...


----------



## Cdale EVO Tom

You would have to ride both the EVO and EVO HiMod to conclude the only difference between the two bikes is weight.

Cannondale's SPEED SAVE technology was originally developed for the EVO frame & fork using BallisTec HiMod Carbon. My guess is substituting that for cheaper materials could rob the original design of some of its magic.

This would make for an interesting A/B test. In the end we all win when there are choices to fit every budget.


----------



## Adrianinkc

I was told by my lbs that you can't tell a difference, they feel the same. Other than of course weight and spec.


----------



## Cdale EVO Tom

Adrian,

Wouldn't it e great if the lbs let you take an EVO Red & a HiMod Red on a long 45mph descent with some high speed turns and shady spots w/ sketchy pavement 

For sure you'd be risking your security deposit, but wouldn't it be fun to see what happens at the outer limits


----------



## allenpg

While being clear on the frame build by model names would be nice, I would think the price difference on certain models would be enough to raise eyebrows. I have the 2013 Evo Ultegra Di2 and love it. At the price point, I knew it wasn't a Hi-Mod frame. I read up on the differences in the new frames. I still have it come in around 15 lbs with carbon clinchers with a G3 hub. Not bad. I should be able to get around 14 lbs with my tubulars. Just like cars, I spend a ton of time research online before dropping a few thousand $$s.


----------



## vegrider

Ya it is a tad misleading on their part, but when i was looking around at them it was obvious that there was a major difference when seeing the price gap between the RED vs other models. The dealer tried telling me it was the same frame, but saw the differences online as well.


----------



## Benneke

The Ksyrium Equipes on the Evo probably weigh 1-2 lbs more than the Rolfs on your R3


----------



## amd

@bryin funny you compare to cervelo, since they do the exact same thing with varying levels of carbon layup and design. 

And most of this extra weight can easily be trace back to the touch points. Seatpost is alu, stem is cdale, bars are aluminum. Wheels are heavy, tires are heavy. Put some 1300g tubies on, carbon bar, seatpost, new stem and maybe even crank, and you're looming at dropping sub 14, probably low 13 no problem. 

I think the cervelo layup weight difference at its worst is something like 150g. Not really something that can't be made up with components. I'd bet cdale is the same.


----------



## aclinjury

When it comes to high speed descents, it's 90% rider, 10% bike, and in most cases, a heavier bike is more stable. I have a 20 yr old Casati Laser, chromoly frame, 1" quill stem, Dura Ace 7400, original Mavic ceramic 20c wheelset, 19.5 lbs loaded. My Casati is probably a noodle compared to all these latest stiff, hi mod, tapered steerer.. yada yada yada... bikes out there. But I hit 48-50 mph straightline regularly, take 35 mph sweepers with a safety margin to spare. Yet, I see guys on their latest superbikes and Zipps and Enves tip toeing. And there guys who have been doing this stuff ridiculously faster than me back in the 60s, 70s, 80s when all bikes were steel, noodly and all.

If any thing happens at the outer limits, it is because of the rider, not the bikes.



Cdale EVO Tom said:


> Adrian,
> 
> Wouldn't it e great if the lbs let you take an EVO Red & a HiMod Red on a long 45mph descent with some high speed turns and shady spots w/ sketchy pavement
> 
> For sure you'd be risking your security deposit, but wouldn't it be fun to see what happens at the outer limits


----------



## Cdale EVO Tom

Well......

For me there was big difference moving from a CAAD9 to the EVO HiMod.

YMMV


----------



## Rashadabd

bryin said:


> I was thinking about Cannondale Super SixEVO with the new Red group... As I did some research I found out there are 3 grades of EVO frames. The grades of carbon get heavier as the bikes get less expensive. The Red model (not the Red Racing model) weighs 15.56lb in 56cm, which is pretty darn heavy for a bike with the new Red. My Cervelo R3 (3 years old) with Ultegra 6700 and Rolfs weighs 15.4 and the nehttp://www.bikerumor.com/2012/06/20/2013-cannondale-supersix-evo-standard-road-disc-cyclocross-womens-bikes/w Red is over a 1lb lighter thena Ultegra 6700 so the Cdale frame has to be 1000+ grams. Cdale is being prettty shady with this, the bikes are all listed on the same page on their site and all bear the same name. They should id the bikes with the lesser carbon with different names. This what all other manhfactures do... Trek, Specialized, Cervelo all make sure the frames with lesser carbon are easier to id.
> 
> I found a real weight for the EVO Red at Infinite Cycles web site...


I actually don't think there is anything sinister going on here. They have been pretty upfront about the different lines since last summer. It looks like a pretty good value to me. I am currently considering grabbing one given my new interest in the new SRAM Red and Di2. The colors on both versions looks sweet:

2013 Cannondale SuperSix EVO Standard Road, Disc Cyclocross & Women’s Bikes - Bike Rumor


----------



## Scott2

View attachment 277758
Find the right LBS and do your research!

I just bought the 2013 Evo mech Dura Ace - awesome bike! If you're going to spend this kind of money you should do your research and know what you're getting and find a shop that will work with you. I went back to my shop several times and rode the regular Super Six, the Red, the Ultegra Di2, the Dura Ace, and the Nano Black Evos - each several times - and asked a ton of questions. The LBS guys were patient and helpful, really clear about the carbon, components, wheels/tires, costs, etc. 

I think all the Cannondales ride similarly but they get progressively smoother, obviously lighter, and "feel" faster as you go up the dollar scale, at least IMO. My other bike is a Wilier GT Ultegra bike which I really like. I was looking for a bike that is lighter and has better components for fast Sunday rides with a group (I'll keep the Wilier for commuting). I rode a lot of different bikes and brands and the Evo was definitely a big improvement across the board for me. I thought all the Evo models were great but the base Red felt a little harsher and the Hi-mod, while very stiff, has a smoother feel. The Nano was even better - that bike is a amazing to ride and and I would never have let them it back if I could justify the price. 

Anyway, you have to recognize that Sales and Marketing is part of any transaction - do your part and follow the buyer beware warning - learn more, ask questions, take your time to make a good purchase that you can live with.

View attachment 277757


Scott


----------



## Rashadabd

Here's more on the difference for anyone that's interested (complete bike weights included):

2013 Cannondale SuperSix EVO Standard Road, Disc Cyclocross & Women’s Bikes - Bike Rumor


----------



## CeeJ68

in what world is a 15.56 lb bike heavy? My Super Six EVO total weight with pedals and all is 15.1 lbs.... that is .1 over the minimum weight for a pro... (i am not a pro, but if that's the standard for them, why should I be any different?) You won't hear 
me complain for one second about the carbon construction of this bike... rides like a dream... and I knew exactly what I was buying when I made my purchase... is there an upgrade in the future? I'm sure there will be, but for now I couldn't be happier with my bike... again... total weight as pictured here is 15.1
View attachment 283211



bryin said:


> I was thinking about Cannondale Super SixEVO with the new Red group... As I did some research I found out there are 3 grades of EVO frames. The grades of carbon get heavier as the bikes get less expensive. The Red model (not the Red Racing model) weighs 15.56lb in 56cm, which is pretty darn heavy for a bike with the new Red. My Cervelo R3 (3 years old) with Ultegra 6700 and Rolfs weighs 15.4 and the new Red is over a 1lb lighter thena Ultegra 6700 so the Cdale frame has to be 1000+ grams. Cdale is being prettty shady with this, the bikes are all listed on the same page on their site and all bear the same name. They should id the bikes with the lesser carbon with different names. This what all other manhfactures do... Trek, Specialized, Cervelo all make sure the frames with lesser carbon are easier to id.
> 
> I found a real weight for the EVO Red at Infinite Cycles web site...


----------



## Trek_5200

Spending several thousand dollars to drop two pounds on the bike is crazy. There needs to be additional advantages when doing the upgrae to even begin justifying that expense.
Weight is only but one factor in a road bike.


----------



## CeeJ68

Agreed.. If you are rolling around at 15-20% body fat you could more effectively reduce net weight by cutting down by 5 lbs or so on your body weight and save a ton of money... Don't get me wrong, I am all about a light bike, but there is just no way I can spend $10,000 for a 12 lb bike.. I have zero complaints about my 15 lb bike... I noticed faster times, stronger climbs and better endurance by dropping 10 pounds of body weight.


----------



## Rashadabd

CeeJ68 said:


> Agreed.. If you are rolling around at 15-20% body fat you could more effectively reduce net weight by cutting down by 5 lbs or so on your body weight and save a ton of money... Don't get me wrong, I am all about a light bike, but there is just no way I can spend $10,000 for a 12 lb bike.. I have zero complaints about my 15 lb bike... I noticed faster times, stronger climbs and better endurance by dropping 10 pounds of body weight.


That's the way I feel as well. I got caugt up in all the insanity for a minute last year, but have regained my sanity. Most people are actually fine with a bike that is 17lbs or under since we almost all have 5-10lbs or so we can lose off our own frames (bodies). It's a win-win, you save money on the bike and increase your fitness. I am also done with now overpaying for brand names. There are ton of good bikes out there that don't have Cervelo, Specialized, Trek, & Cannondale on them. Diamondback, Devinci, BH, Felt, GT, Ridley, Scott, Raleigh and a bunch of other companies now make well-made bikes that are often cheaper and perform just as well for most of us.


----------



## CeeJ68

There is a locally manufactured brand here you could add to that list as well... Fezarri makes a very nice frame at a fraction of the cost as well...


----------



## Trek_5200

This is well documented elsewhere, but personal experience confirms that 2-3 pounds lighter bike has no benefit except a marginal one when climbing up hills.


----------



## froze

Warpdatframe said:


> You don't need it to be any lighter when you put race wheels on. The uci weight minimun is 15 lbs and you don't need this bike if you're not racing.


I guess I'll be the only person to agree with you!


----------



## Camilo

CeeJ68 said:


> in what world is a 15.56 lb bike heavy? My Super Six EVO total weight with pedals and all is 15.1 lbs.... that is .1 over the minimum weight for a pro... (i am not a pro, but if that's the standard for them, why should I be any different?) You won't hear
> me complain for one second about the carbon construction of this bike... rides like a dream... and I knew exactly what I was buying when I made my purchase... is there an upgrade in the future? I'm sure there will be, but for now I couldn't be happier with my bike... again... total weight as pictured here is 15.1
> View attachment 283211


You could get it down to a decent weight if you lost the race number  [it's a joke for the humor impaired]

Very nice bike!


----------



## Scott2

Trek_5200 said:


> Spending several thousand dollars to drop two pounds on the bike is crazy. There needs to be additional advantages when doing the upgrae to even begin justifying that expense.
> Weight is only but one factor in a road bike.


I don't know about everyone else, but for me the weight was only one element in the decision. The hi-mod frame feels and handles different and in a way that was noticeable and good for me, I love the Dura_Ace 11 speed, the DA brakes, the spider crank, the carbon bars and stem, the killer wheels, etc. There's a bunch of real and significant upgrades that altogether make this an awesome bike. That doesn't mean it's great for everyone and do I really need it? No - I kept my Wilier which is probably 3 pounds heavier (sub-14 for the Evo, ~16 1/2 for the Wilier) and I really like riding both of them. But guess which bike goes on the Sunday group rides:thumbsup: ?


----------

