# 1990 Cannondale Black Lightning - Price?



## silasmckenna (May 12, 2013)

Whatcha guys think of this? 

1990 Cannondale R500 "black lightning"

I'm a newbie and have been searching for a cheap bike for a while. My budget is around $500 (though, less is always better). I found a sexy looking bike for around $350, but after researching I found it sells new from Walmart for $275. LOL

Looking for some advice. I am 6'3" and it has been hard to find a bike in the 59-62cm range.


----------



## bikerjulio (Jan 19, 2010)

Wally's is selling 1990 bikes?? WTF are you trying to say?

I was just involved in a similar thread where it was agreed that about $100 would be OK for a similar vintage Cannondale in good condition.

That's one horrible aerobar setup BTW.

All this being said I'd bet this is 100X better than anything being currently being sold in Wallyworld.


----------



## bigbill (Feb 15, 2005)

Might be worth close to $500. It has several upgrades including Microshift levers, a carbon fork, and decent wheels. The only thing that is 1990 is the frame. Offer $400 and see what he says.


----------



## american psycho (Jul 21, 2005)

I'd never buy an aluminum road bike, especially used.

Stiff frame = harsh ride and more prone to crack than steel.


----------



## bigbill (Feb 15, 2005)

american psycho said:


> I'd never buy an aluminum road bike, especially used.
> 
> Stiff frame = harsh ride and more prone to crack than steel.


I've got a 94 Cannondale 2.8 that I raced for many seasons, crashed a few times, and has spent the last four years clamped in a trainer getting sweated all over and generally abused. It's fine. Cannondales, especially older ones are well made and not prone to cracking.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

bigbill said:


> I've got a 94 Cannondale 2.8 that I raced for many seasons, crashed a few times, and has spent the last four years clamped in a trainer getting sweated all over and generally abused. It's fine. *Cannondales, especially older ones are well made and not prone to cracking.*


Not doubting your experiences, but given its inherent (fatiguing) characteristics, alu IS prone to failing - and rather quickly at that.

The manufacturer is irrelevant, but both the age of the frame and material are _very_ relevant. 

Aluminium - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Fatigue (material) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

When shopping for bikes of this vintage, steel is the better alternative, IMO.


----------



## ovid9 (May 16, 2013)

I'll second american psycho's opinion. I didn't experience Cannondales of that era, but I rode a Trek 1100 for a couple years after a horrible incident involving a steel frame, a roof rack and a garage. 

Anyway I hated that Trek frame. 

It was light, it was fast, but on the awful tar & chip roads I ride it beat the hell out of me and I only weighed around 130lbs at the time. Maybe my light weight was part of the problem. lol 

It turned me off to aluminum frames though I understand they've gotten much better in that regard in the ensuing 15 years or so.


----------



## JaeP (Mar 12, 2002)

I don't think that's an original Black Lighting. The original Black Lightning didn't have cantilivered rear stays as these were introduced in 1989 with the 3.0 crit series. Anyway, it's a lovely bike. I cut my teeth on a 3.0 series 'Dale. And like previous posters have stated she was a harsh ride because the 3.0 was designed for crit racing (steep angles, higher bottom bracket and very short wheelbase). The R500 series were designed to be more compliant to road riding.


----------



## wim (Feb 28, 2005)

JaeP said:


> I don't think that's an original Black Lighting. The original Black Lightning didn't have cantilivered rear stays as these were introduced in 1989 with the 3.0 crit series.


Correct if by "original" you mean "first." But the "Black Lightning" models were available over quite some time, including pre-cantilever and cantilever years. Point being, there _are_ genuine "Black Lightning" bikes with cantilevered stays. Then again, it was just a color scheme put on a mid-level model, so it's nothing to get overly excited about.


----------



## JaeP (Mar 12, 2002)

wim said:


> Correct if by "original" you mean "first." But the "Black Lightning" models were available over quite some time, including pre-cantilever and cantilever years. Point being, there _are_ genuine "Black Lightning" bikes with cantilevered stays. Then again, it was just a color scheme put on a mid-level model, so it's nothing to get overly excited about.


Thanks Wim. That's good to know. I still have a soft spot for an original Black Lightning with Suntour components. Man, I wish I never sold my Cannondale.


----------



## wim (Feb 28, 2005)

JaeP said:


> Man, I wish I never sold my Cannondale.


This may console you a bit: I raced my "Criterium Series" 3.0 blue Cannondale in the late 80s and early 90 and loved that bike. Four centimeters too small for me, but I didn't care then. Sold it in 1996 or so. Recently I had a chance to ride one of those 3.0 Cannondales again for a few minutes and was not impressed. Clearly, I only remembered the good things and forgot the bad.


----------



## Woyteck Morajko (Jan 7, 2005)

my wife's blacklightning is 20 years old, must have 40k miles. so does mine, and I weigh 230lbs. I must object to these being called brittle and break-prone.


----------

