# 2010 CAAD9 vs 2009 Six Carbon



## DR2000 (Jan 28, 2009)

Hello guys and gals.

I'm thinking of getting back into cycling after my bike being stolen last year, and would hope for some advice on making the best decision on the bike. I read through a lot of threads posted on the forum with regards to these bikes that I could find, but what's lacking for me is the direct comparison between the two.

The bike that I had that was stolen was 2009 CAAD9 5 and I liked it a lot and had a lot of fun with it.

So naturally the first thing I looked at was the new 2010 CAAD9 5 which looks good and has several improvements (although the crank went from Shimano 105 to some name unknown to me, and I liked the old colors better).

However the owner (LBS) said that they still had some 2009 models and they were on sale. One in particular was 2009 Six Carbon 6. The price is the same as 2010 CAAD9 5 would be.

Part-wise they seems to be pretty much the same, both mostly Shimano 105, which would be just fine for me.

Does the carbon frame of six worth it over the much loved CAAD9 frame? Is Six a better deal in this case?

I don't do any racing and mostly do ride on local bike paths several times a week, around 20-30 miles a ride, nothing serious, at least not yet.

Thank you very much for your help.
Your advice is much appreciated.

- Daniel


----------



## itgb (Sep 25, 2009)

I originally tried out an '09 Six Carbon Six and traded it in for a '10 CAAD9-5 a week later. The CAAD9-5 has lighter wheels, more comfortable seat(at least for me), BB-30 bottom bracket(which is lighter), and a full carbon fork. The carbon frame of the Six is actually heaver than the CAAD9 frame, because they use low-grade carbon fiber. It was really an easy decision to go with the CAAD9-5.

Hope that helps.


----------



## jlandry (Jan 12, 2007)

I'm glad I read this question and answer. I've been mulling over this same dilemma.
After investigating, I've decided the CAAD9 is a better choice over the "bragging rights" of the 6 carbon 6.


----------



## DR2000 (Jan 28, 2009)

Ah, that makes it easier for me. I know that I liked my CAAD9 a lot, and don't want to change anything really. But at the same didn't want to miss a good deal if it was that.

Thank you for your answer.


----------



## thechriswebb (Nov 21, 2008)

I say go with the CAAD 9. It probably has more street cred than any other aluminum bike on the market right now. The consensus these days is that a top end carbon frame is the "best" right now, and I am not prepared to argue against that. However, a lot of people will argue that a top end aluminum frame is superior to a lessor carbon frame. I'm not saying that there is anything whatsoever that is wrong with a six frame. If somebody gave me one I would happily ride it. Let's look at it for what it is though. The Six is not Cannondale's top end carbon frame. It is a more affordable frame for people who absolutely have to have carbon but can't afford a Super. That is fine, and it is a very high quality frame that would bring you lots of joy and enjoyment. On the other hand, the CAAD 9 is the top end aluminum frame made by a company that built their reputation on the quality of their aluminum bikes. I'm not in the position to definitively say that the CAAD 9 is "better," but I know what my choice would be in your situation.


Remember, there are many people out there who would not be caught dead on an aluminum bike because carbon is the trend right now. Do a search and you will probably find 1000 threads dedicated to that argument. I would expect that if this thread hangs around for long enough, somebody will answer your question and say that you should definitely go with the Six and they will school you on how much more comfortable it is and the stiffness of carbon and the harsh ride of aluminum, blah blah blah  . These things are not universally true, and I am prepared to argue that. Within that argument, I estimate that there is 50% science and 50% marketing. I have been riding Cannondale aluminum frames for years and I think the harshness argument is terribly overblown. I ride often and my rides are usually about 3 hours long. I really don't have a problem with it at all. There may be some subtleties that I just don't have the experience and fine discernment to decipher, like the princess and the pea. I can't feel the pea. I'm not a princess. 

Carbon fiber technology is incredible and has totally revolutionized the world of frame building. There are some carbon frames out there that are pure CRAP, and the CAAD 9 is not crap by any stretch of the imagination (neither is the Six!). There are a lot of people that would rather ride a low end carbon frame than a high end aluminum frame with better spec, and they will be very quick to tell you how inferior aluminum is to carbon  I'm sorry, that just seems so silly to me. Do another search and you will find many threads with some very upset people who bought lower end carbon frames from some very prestigious companies and were terribly disappointed when they exploded. 

Anyway, my point is:

The CAAD 9 is the absolute pinnacle of Cannondale's aluminum technology, and they are known for the quality of their aluminum bikes. That is an aluminum bike made as well as they can possibly make one.

The SuperSix is the absolute pinnacle of Cannondale's carbon technology. The Six is not the pinnacle of their carbon technology, and is purposely made to a different standard than the SuperSix so that they can sell it for less. They do this to have a bike to sell to people who have to have carbon, but can't afford a Super.

You will be happy with your bike whatever you do though. It is certainly a win win situation.


----------



## DR2000 (Jan 28, 2009)

Thank you for another great reply. I much appreciate your opinion on this, guys.


----------



## Linga115 (Aug 14, 2008)

about a year ago i was torn between the same two bikes. in the end i bought the six carbon 3. over the last year ive pretty much upgraded every part. it now sits with sram red and easton wheels. etc. 

had i known that i would have upgraded everything, i probably would have gotten a CAAD. 

that being said. i am completely happy with my bike. it has done everything for me. everything from collegiate race weekends to century training rides. i have no complaint for the bike. sure its a few grams heavier than a CAAD but who cares.

my friend bought a CAAD 9 5 not much after i bought my six. one thing i have noticed is that after we do our 50+ mile rides. i am much more fresh while he is feeling the effects of a super stiff frame. carbon absorbs the road much better than aluminum. the result, i am able to still punch it in miles 70-90 while my friend on the CAAD is too worn out to keep up. 

overall i am happy with my decision. sure its not the lightest stiffest thing out there. but for me its perfect. if a bike can race a crit on saturday and then go for a fun 80 mile ride the next day. i call that a good bike. (not that the caad cant do that. you'll just be hurting a bit more) since i only plan on owning one road bike, i went with carbon. not because its carbon, but because it is more comfortable to ride than aluminum.

just thought id put one down for the six. this thread seems to be CAAD heavy.


----------



## Devastator (May 11, 2009)

If you like get up and sprint or climb hills get the CAAD. I currently ride a 09 Super which has a silky smooth ride, but everytime Im on hills or sprinting, I miss the stiffness of my Systemsix, which has the same rear triangle as the CAAD.


----------



## shortyt (Mar 22, 2009)

I second that!!




Linga115 said:


> about a year ago i was torn between the same two bikes. in the end i bought the six carbon 3. over the last year ive pretty much upgraded every part. it now sits with sram red and easton wheels. etc.
> 
> had i known that i would have upgraded everything, i probably would have gotten a CAAD.
> 
> ...


----------



## Kappaccino (Jun 21, 2009)

I'd like to subscribe to your newsletter. kthx


----------



## Caine (May 20, 2006)

Linga115 said:


> i went with carbon...because it is more comfortable to ride than aluminum.



Please ignore any statements this simple. Statements like don't take into account frame design, components, fit, rider fitness, etc.. 

Also any anecdotal "evidence" rooted in the idea that someone is better than their friend because their friend doesn't ride carbon is just as silly.


Ride both if you can. You'll be better able to discern any differences in the frames if you can at least ride them with the same wheels, if not the exact components. Your choice should be based on what sensations you _prefer_ not what someone tells you is _better_.


----------



## ShadowWraith25 (Dec 1, 2008)

Your best bet would be to ride both before you make a decision.

I kept flipping back and forth between the CAAD9-5 and the Six Carbon 5, but rode both and decided to take the Six. Compared to my previous aluminum frame, the Six feels a bit more forgiving and comfortable on longer rides. However, it feels a little less "alive" than aluminum does.

Looking at specs alone, the 2010 CAAD 9 has some better componenets than the 2009 Six Carbon 6. The CAAD has slightly better wheels, a better fork, and the BB30.


----------



## jlandry (Jan 12, 2007)

Here's a review of the Six Carbon 5:
http://www.roadbikeaction.com/fly.aspx?layout=content&taxid=67&cid=2736


----------



## DR2000 (Jan 28, 2009)

Just back from LBS, placed an order for 2010 CAAD9-4 in black. Got a good deal from what I understand -- $1500. Can't wait to get it.


----------



## fazzman (Mar 12, 2008)

Dealers here are asking $1699.


----------



## squareslinky (Aug 13, 2009)

fazzman said:


> Dealers here are asking $1699.


I recently paid $1699 for my 9-4 in black.


----------



## JoeJITSU (Jan 18, 2010)

ShadowWraith25 said:


> Your best bet would be to ride both before you make a decision.
> 
> I kept flipping back and forth between the CAAD9-5 and the Six Carbon 5, but rode both and decided to take the Six. Compared to my previous aluminum frame, the Six feels a bit more forgiving and comfortable on longer rides. However, it feels a little less "alive" than aluminum does.
> 
> Looking at specs alone, the 2010 CAAD 9 has some better componenets than the 2009 Six Carbon 6. The CAAD has slightly better wheels, a better fork, and the BB30.


 SIX CARBON 5 also has the BB30


----------



## khaizlip (Aug 21, 2008)

I got my 9-4 for $1600 + tax. 

due at the end of April. . . . it's going to be a long two months!


----------



## easyridernyc (Jan 10, 2008)

010 caad series looks nice..black look smooth

but the 5 in grey is giving me a boner. nice footprint


----------



## squareslinky (Aug 13, 2009)

khaizlip said:


> I got my 9-4 for $1600 + tax.
> 
> due at the end of April. . . . it's going to be a long two months!


Mine came a lot quicker than they said it would. Maybe you will get it sooner.


----------



## ph0enix (Aug 12, 2009)

jlandry said:


> Here's a review of the Six Carbon 5:
> http://www.roadbikeaction.com/fly.aspx?layout=content&taxid=67&cid=2736


That's a 2010 Six Carbon 5 which is a lot different from the 2009 model. I wish I knew how they got the 18.4lbs on a 56 without swapping components. Mine was 19.15lbs out of the box and it's a 54.


----------



## mgordon75 (Jun 9, 2010)

Would anyone have any information on a 2010 CAAD9 vs 2009 Six 5

These are the bikes I’m considering and I’m torn between both. One is the Cannondale 2010 CAAD9 5 and one is a 2009 Cannondale Six 5.

A little about my ride:
I commute daily to and from work (Brooklyn to Manhattan) 25 miles total. I'm riding a Specialized Rockhopper now and am looking to buy a road bike as my building started allowing bikes into the tenants space (Bicycle access law). No need to bring a taped over bike to lock up. 
There are bumps on the way as NYC/Brooklyn streets are not the smoothest. I rode both at the LBS and cant really tell from the short 10-15 minutes ride how I'll feel on a Alum bike vs. mixed carbon bike after my ride or at the end of the day. I ride once in awhile 50+ mile rides and would like to extend that and not feel fatigued (I'd want to have the feeling that this bike feels good and i just want to continue). Im in shape 5'10 175lbs.


Differences are as follows

2010 CAAD9 5 MSRP $1499 - LBS for $1199
• Full Aluminum frame Made in the USA (lighter than the other bike!)
• Shimano 105 gruppo (except for Tecktro brakes)
• BB30 Crank – (more power than the other bike)
http://www.cannondale.com/usa/usaen...Road/CAAD9/Details/1244-0RA95D_0RA95C-CAAD9-5

2009 Six 5 MSRP $1799 – on sale for $1149
• 18.8 lbs mixed frame made in China or Taiwan? - aluminum triangle with carbon fork and carbon chain and seat stays down to the dropout) 
• Shimano 105 gruppo (except for Tecktro brakes) and Rear derailleur is Ultegra 
• Regular Shimano crank
http://www.cannondale.com/usa/usaeng/Products/2009/Road/Elite-Road/Details/1540-9RCT5D_9RCT5C-SIX-5


----------



## easyridernyc (Jan 10, 2008)

the six five

then swap out those wheels for a light pair of eastons are you are in business buster brown. 

i think without the stays, and as good as it might be, the nine five might be a bit overrated. based on observations and a few conversations with owners/riders of the nine five. that six is a nice bike, save six hundred bucks? 

good deal. jump on it before its gone


----------

