SuperSix Evo Regrets
10-26-19, 04:43 AM
#26
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 1,680
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 980 Post(s)
Liked 776 Times
in
402 Posts
I agree to a great extent @bpcyclist. Especially early-on, when I was just getting into cycling, I really didn't know what I liked, how I would be riding, etc. It was all new to me which led to some impulse purchases. Now, even though I'm just approaching the half-year mark, I've ridden over 2000 miles, a lot of it really pushing myself and varying up my rides (some intra-city, some outside on long paths with no stops, hills, flats, etc.). Now I have a very good idea of what I'm looking for in a bike.
True, a quick 10 minute ride near the LBS isn't going to simulate that, but my early impulse purchases (and one mistake) has allowed me to build relationships with a few LBSs that carry different manufacturers, and would let me use a bike for an extended time. Maybe not a week, but for a decent amount of time. And those LBSs are near where I do a lot of riding, with some challenging stretches, so I could really put a new bike through its paces.
However, the TCR and S3 has really cooled my impulse purchasing. They're both such a blast to ride, that if I even do test out a bike, it's more for curiosity rather than serious purchasing intent. Don't get me wrong, if some make/model were to knock my socks off, I would be tempted, but these two bikes...and the TCR especially...are highly rated and respected models. They may not be everything to everyone, but they tick off just about all of the boxes in terms of what I'm looking for in a ride.
True, a quick 10 minute ride near the LBS isn't going to simulate that, but my early impulse purchases (and one mistake) has allowed me to build relationships with a few LBSs that carry different manufacturers, and would let me use a bike for an extended time. Maybe not a week, but for a decent amount of time. And those LBSs are near where I do a lot of riding, with some challenging stretches, so I could really put a new bike through its paces.
However, the TCR and S3 has really cooled my impulse purchasing. They're both such a blast to ride, that if I even do test out a bike, it's more for curiosity rather than serious purchasing intent. Don't get me wrong, if some make/model were to knock my socks off, I would be tempted, but these two bikes...and the TCR especially...are highly rated and respected models. They may not be everything to everyone, but they tick off just about all of the boxes in terms of what I'm looking for in a ride.
No offense but it’s hard to take your criticism of the SuperSix seriously. Especially as it is adjective based with no real data.
10-26-19, 04:55 AM
#27
Senior Member
You bought the SuperSix, TCR, and S3 all within a very short period of time and still test out other bikes for curiosity sake just in case (or hopes is more like it) something else wows you?
No offense but it’s hard to take your criticism of the SuperSix seriously. Especially as it is adjective based with no real data.
No offense but it’s hard to take your criticism of the SuperSix seriously. Especially as it is adjective based with no real data.
Most of us don’t have access to wind tunnels and don’t have time (or the equipment) to do the GCN method of riding bikes at the exact same distance at the exact same wattage and post results. You want to send me two power meters for my other bikes, and pay for my time to compare, happy to do so. That’s how GCN are able to do it. Corporate sponsorships, and revenue from their videos and site visits. It’s literally their jobs. I, and from what I’ve seen here most BF members, don’t fall in that category, and as such share our opinions based on subjective data. That’s why I’ve shared how the bike makes me feel while riding it.
When I’m in the market again I’ll look forward to your data filled reviews of bikes, though!
10-26-19, 05:03 AM
#28
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 1,680
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 980 Post(s)
Liked 776 Times
in
402 Posts
I’m not here to try and win you over. The vast majority of reviews I’ve seen both here in this forum and in the web are adjective based. That’s usually what an Internet forum is for, sharing opinions and experiences.
Most of us don’t have access to wind tunnels and don’t have time (or the equipment) to do the GCN method of riding bikes at the exact same distance at the exact same wattage and post results. You want to send me two power meters for my other bikes, and pay for my time to compare, happy to do so. That’s how GCN are able to do it. Corporate sponsorships, and revenue from their videos and site visits. It’s literally their jobs. I, and from what I’ve seen here most BF members, don’t fall in that category, and as such share our opinions based on subjective data. That’s why I’ve shared how the bike makes me feel while riding it.
When I’m in the market again I’ll look forward to your data filled reviews of bikes, though!
Most of us don’t have access to wind tunnels and don’t have time (or the equipment) to do the GCN method of riding bikes at the exact same distance at the exact same wattage and post results. You want to send me two power meters for my other bikes, and pay for my time to compare, happy to do so. That’s how GCN are able to do it. Corporate sponsorships, and revenue from their videos and site visits. It’s literally their jobs. I, and from what I’ve seen here most BF members, don’t fall in that category, and as such share our opinions based on subjective data. That’s why I’ve shared how the bike makes me feel while riding it.
When I’m in the market again I’ll look forward to your data filled reviews of bikes, though!
Your totally subjective review is valid because other people occasionally post totally subjective reviews
Wind tunnels, power meters, and corporate sponsors are of course the only way to review a bike.
If only there was something else. Something like a popular segment recording app that could effectively tell you over time if an average on one bike is equal to that of another bike on the same route
10-26-19, 05:08 AM
#29
Senior Member
My bad.
Your totally subjective review is valid because other people occasionally post totally subjective reviews
Wind tunnels, power meters, and corporate sponsors are of course the only way to review a bike.
If only there was something else. Something like a popular segment recording app that could effectively tell you over time if an average on one bike is equal to that of another bike on the same route
Your totally subjective review is valid because other people occasionally post totally subjective reviews
Wind tunnels, power meters, and corporate sponsors are of course the only way to review a bike.
If only there was something else. Something like a popular segment recording app that could effectively tell you over time if an average on one bike is equal to that of another bike on the same route
Why don't I share it? Because there are some internet people out there who...as you say "no offense"...I'd rather not have my personal data.
10-26-19, 05:15 AM
#30
Jedi Master
Look and feel are totally legitimate ways to evaluate bikes. If it were all about meaningful performance gains most of us would be riding much cheaper bikes. Unfortunately nobody cares if I finish the same strava segment a minute faster or slower.
10-26-19, 05:34 AM
#31
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 1,680
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 980 Post(s)
Liked 776 Times
in
402 Posts
Ways to evaluate bikes for yourself personally.
Most certainly not ways to review a bike though.
Especially as he later went on to state that the bike was 60% less quality than the other bikes. Really? That is also look and feel? Where in the world did that number come from?
Ohh, and ofc you can’t disregard the fact that a short time after he purchased the SuperSix the tubes became big and clunky
10-26-19, 06:26 AM
#32
Jedi Master
Yes.
Ways to evaluate bikes for yourself personally.
Most certainly not ways to review a bike though.
Especially as he later went on to state that the bike was 60% less quality than the other bikes. Really? That is also look and feel? Where in the world did that number come from?
Ohh, and ofc you can’t disregard the fact that a short time after he purchased the SuperSix the tubes became big and clunky
Ways to evaluate bikes for yourself personally.
Most certainly not ways to review a bike though.
Especially as he later went on to state that the bike was 60% less quality than the other bikes. Really? That is also look and feel? Where in the world did that number come from?
Ohh, and ofc you can’t disregard the fact that a short time after he purchased the SuperSix the tubes became big and clunky
10-26-19, 09:46 AM
#33
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,163
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 344 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 20 Times
in
18 Posts
You bought the SuperSix, TCR, and S3 all within a very short period of time and still test out other bikes for curiosity sake just in case (or hopes is more like it) something else wows you?
No offense but it’s hard to take your criticism of the SuperSix seriously. Especially as it is adjective based with no real data.
No offense but it’s hard to take your criticism of the SuperSix seriously. Especially as it is adjective based with no real data.
Likes For cycledogg:
10-26-19, 10:17 AM
#34
Senior Member
Yes.
Ways to evaluate bikes for yourself personally.
Most certainly not ways to review a bike though.
Especially as he later went on to state that the bike was 60% less quality than the other bikes. Really? That is also look and feel? Where in the world did that number come from?
Ohh, and ofc you can’t disregard the fact that a short time after he purchased the SuperSix the tubes became big and clunky
Ways to evaluate bikes for yourself personally.
Most certainly not ways to review a bike though.
Especially as he later went on to state that the bike was 60% less quality than the other bikes. Really? That is also look and feel? Where in the world did that number come from?
Ohh, and ofc you can’t disregard the fact that a short time after he purchased the SuperSix the tubes became big and clunky
The specific model I purchased had a 60% MSRP of the other. I was agreeing with an earlier comment of "you get what you pay for". And yes, I feel the specific SuperSix I got was 60% of the TCR and S3 builds. The SuperSix came with standard aluminum wheels. The TCR came with Black Inc Thirty carbon wheels. The S3 came with ENVE 5.6 wheels. The SuperSix came with standard handlebars. The TCR came with Giant's near top of the line carbon handlebar. The S3 came with Cervelo's carbon aerobar. The SuperSix came with a standard seatpost. The TCR has an ISP. The S3 comes with Cervelo's oddly shaped, but effectively compliant, carbon aero post.
Since conventional wisdom here at BF seems to be wheels are the best and most impactful upgrades on can make on a bike (a sentiment I agree with), and given the difference in handlebars and seatpost, along with the difference in carbon layups (the TCR SL1 uses Giant's top of the line carbon, the S3 uses Cervelo's second to best carbon layup, behind the S5). That's how I arrived at 60%--admittedly just convenient estimate number, there's no scientific way to actually say "carbon wheels + better handlebars + better seatpost + better carbon layup = X% improvement".
Now if I was comparing the top models at the same MSRP, and said the SuperSix Evo Hi Mod was 60% of the TCR SL1, I could understand why someone would challenge that.
With regards to the "tubes suddenly becoming clunky"--it's all about exposure to makes and models and how one progresses through life. When I first saw a Camaro I thoght that was super aero. Then I saw an NSX. Then I saw a Ferrari. Then I saw a Bugatti. Does that mean I have to have the same opinion that I had of the Camaro and that I'm not allowed to change and grow over time as I get exposed to new models?
10-26-19, 12:20 PM
#35
Senior Member
So it's the 60% that bothers you...let me further explain how I arrived at that. And keep in mind I said it was due the cost of the specific SuperSix model being roughly 60% of the S3 and TCR models I own. It wasn't a blanket "Cannondale is 60% of Giant and Cervelo" or even "the SuperSix is 60% of the TCR or S3". All those bikes have models that are in the $2K range all the way up to $10K+.
The specific model I purchased had a 60% MSRP of the other. I was agreeing with an earlier comment of "you get what you pay for". And yes, I feel the specific SuperSix I got was 60% of the TCR and S3 builds. The SuperSix came with standard aluminum wheels. The TCR came with Black Inc Thirty carbon wheels. The S3 came with ENVE 5.6 wheels. The SuperSix came with standard handlebars. The TCR came with Giant's near top of the line carbon handlebar. The S3 came with Cervelo's carbon aerobar. The SuperSix came with a standard seatpost. The TCR has an ISP. The S3 comes with Cervelo's oddly shaped, but effectively compliant, carbon aero post.
Since conventional wisdom here at BF seems to be wheels are the best and most impactful upgrades on can make on a bike (a sentiment I agree with), and given the difference in handlebars and seatpost, along with the difference in carbon layups (the TCR SL1 uses Giant's top of the line carbon, the S3 uses Cervelo's second to best carbon layup, behind the S5). That's how I arrived at 60%--admittedly just convenient estimate number, there's no scientific way to actually say "carbon wheels + better handlebars + better seatpost + better carbon layup = X% improvement".
Now if I was comparing the top models at the same MSRP, and said the SuperSix Evo Hi Mod was 60% of the TCR SL1, I could understand why someone would challenge that.
With regards to the "tubes suddenly becoming clunky"--it's all about exposure to makes and models and how one progresses through life. When I first saw a Camaro I thoght that was super aero. Then I saw an NSX. Then I saw a Ferrari. Then I saw a Bugatti. Does that mean I have to have the same opinion that I had of the Camaro and that I'm not allowed to change and grow over time as I get exposed to new models?
The specific model I purchased had a 60% MSRP of the other. I was agreeing with an earlier comment of "you get what you pay for". And yes, I feel the specific SuperSix I got was 60% of the TCR and S3 builds. The SuperSix came with standard aluminum wheels. The TCR came with Black Inc Thirty carbon wheels. The S3 came with ENVE 5.6 wheels. The SuperSix came with standard handlebars. The TCR came with Giant's near top of the line carbon handlebar. The S3 came with Cervelo's carbon aerobar. The SuperSix came with a standard seatpost. The TCR has an ISP. The S3 comes with Cervelo's oddly shaped, but effectively compliant, carbon aero post.
Since conventional wisdom here at BF seems to be wheels are the best and most impactful upgrades on can make on a bike (a sentiment I agree with), and given the difference in handlebars and seatpost, along with the difference in carbon layups (the TCR SL1 uses Giant's top of the line carbon, the S3 uses Cervelo's second to best carbon layup, behind the S5). That's how I arrived at 60%--admittedly just convenient estimate number, there's no scientific way to actually say "carbon wheels + better handlebars + better seatpost + better carbon layup = X% improvement".
Now if I was comparing the top models at the same MSRP, and said the SuperSix Evo Hi Mod was 60% of the TCR SL1, I could understand why someone would challenge that.
With regards to the "tubes suddenly becoming clunky"--it's all about exposure to makes and models and how one progresses through life. When I first saw a Camaro I thoght that was super aero. Then I saw an NSX. Then I saw a Ferrari. Then I saw a Bugatti. Does that mean I have to have the same opinion that I had of the Camaro and that I'm not allowed to change and grow over time as I get exposed to new models?
10-26-19, 01:21 PM
#36
Senior Member
10-26-19, 03:12 PM
#37
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Nor Cal
Posts: 6,016
Mentioned: 17 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1814 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 923 Times
in
569 Posts
I wonder what percentage of people’s opinion about a certain bike just comes from their bottom brackets being out of spec and therefore misaligning the bearing or allowing flex. Bike shops will never tell you “hey buddy, sorry, but your BB has 0.5mm of parallel misalignment, 2 deg of angular misalignment, and the right cup is oval with a 0.3mm maximum difference in radius.” Even if something is “within tolerance” and “not a warranty issue”, you’ll still never know whether your bike is a good specimen or not. Part of me believes that, in a Cannondale especially, a bottom bracket tolerance issue would completely overwhelm any difference in frame layup, even between bikes of different price points.
Do these numbers relate to actual bottom brackets, or are they made up for illustration?
Seems like it would take a big hammer to get something like that together.
10-28-19, 01:19 PM
#39
Full Member
Thread Starter
I nearly forgot I started this thread! Good stuff.
Thinking it through a bit more, a couple of points raised here strike me as key. First, "lively" could just be a a result of a frame/wheels transmitting more energy from the road to the rider. That doesn't necessarily make it a faster bike -- it could make it less efficient. Second, another factor in the liveliness of my bike is how well it corners at speed. I did some cornering drills this weekend and it actually performed well near the end of the drills. I think this is mostly a result of my regaining confidence to take aggressive lines, rather than the bike. Also, wheels and especially tires are the most important factor here, I think.
Regarding power transfer, on the indoor trainer this Sunday doing some drills, I actually hit power numbers close to what I achieved on my old bike, which could indicate that my new frame/BB is stiffer and more efficient, given that I'm still not up to my prior level of physical fitness.
Finally, I need to get more used to the larger frame. Maybe my regret is less with the bike model and more with the frame size. I'm 6'1.25", so a 58 frame should be right. But the old 56 frame seemed more sporty and, hey, the pros use small frames so it must be best! But actually, I got to talk with Jens Voight this spring and learned that he raced a 60 and is just an inch taller than me. And plenty of accomplished amateurs I know who are my height or even slightly shorter ride 58s, so I don't think this frame size will ultimately hold me back.
Lots of more analysis could be done, but I don't have the inclination to spend more money on a stable of road bikes, so I am probably better off training the best I can with what I have -- which is still a nice bike. If I had to do it over again, I might more seriously consider an equally spec'd Tarmac, but that's also more $$.
Thinking it through a bit more, a couple of points raised here strike me as key. First, "lively" could just be a a result of a frame/wheels transmitting more energy from the road to the rider. That doesn't necessarily make it a faster bike -- it could make it less efficient. Second, another factor in the liveliness of my bike is how well it corners at speed. I did some cornering drills this weekend and it actually performed well near the end of the drills. I think this is mostly a result of my regaining confidence to take aggressive lines, rather than the bike. Also, wheels and especially tires are the most important factor here, I think.
Regarding power transfer, on the indoor trainer this Sunday doing some drills, I actually hit power numbers close to what I achieved on my old bike, which could indicate that my new frame/BB is stiffer and more efficient, given that I'm still not up to my prior level of physical fitness.
Finally, I need to get more used to the larger frame. Maybe my regret is less with the bike model and more with the frame size. I'm 6'1.25", so a 58 frame should be right. But the old 56 frame seemed more sporty and, hey, the pros use small frames so it must be best! But actually, I got to talk with Jens Voight this spring and learned that he raced a 60 and is just an inch taller than me. And plenty of accomplished amateurs I know who are my height or even slightly shorter ride 58s, so I don't think this frame size will ultimately hold me back.
Lots of more analysis could be done, but I don't have the inclination to spend more money on a stable of road bikes, so I am probably better off training the best I can with what I have -- which is still a nice bike. If I had to do it over again, I might more seriously consider an equally spec'd Tarmac, but that's also more $$.
10-29-19, 08:46 AM
#42
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Southern California
Posts: 1,416
Bikes: 2019 Supersix Evo, 2002 Trek 2000
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 273 Post(s)
Liked 45 Times
in
32 Posts
I feel the need to interject:
I'm on my second SuperSix (non-evo, 2014 and 2019) and it's a great bike. I feel like I got my money's-worth (and then some!)
It is not holding me back.
I'm on my second SuperSix (non-evo, 2014 and 2019) and it's a great bike. I feel like I got my money's-worth (and then some!)
It is not holding me back.
Likes For goenrdoug:
10-29-19, 12:23 PM
#43
Full Member
It's the tires. 23c on a 15mm wide rim to a 25c on a 19mm wide. You're probably going from 23mm to 27mm wide tires. Those Mavic (Hutchinson) tires have super soft sidewalls and transition side to side on a funky arc. The newer tires are going to do things like grip and ride well rather than scrubbing and vibrating the hell out of you.
Try mounting a friends old school wheels on the bike (maybe the bike store has an old set of Mavics laying around you can plop the 11sp cassette into. Also, try putting a more pressure in the current tires or mounting a fresh set of GP5ks.
Try mounting a friends old school wheels on the bike (maybe the bike store has an old set of Mavics laying around you can plop the 11sp cassette into. Also, try putting a more pressure in the current tires or mounting a fresh set of GP5ks.
Last edited by jfranci3; 10-29-19 at 12:26 PM.
10-30-19, 09:09 AM
#44
Full Member
Thread Starter
It's the tires. 23c on a 15mm wide rim to a 25c on a 19mm wide. You're probably going from 23mm to 27mm wide tires. Those Mavic (Hutchinson) tires have super soft sidewalls and transition side to side on a funky arc. The newer tires are going to do things like grip and ride well rather than scrubbing and vibrating the hell out of you.
Try mounting a friends old school wheels on the bike (maybe the bike store has an old set of Mavics laying around you can plop the 11sp cassette into. Also, try putting a more pressure in the current tires or mounting a fresh set of GP5ks.
Try mounting a friends old school wheels on the bike (maybe the bike store has an old set of Mavics laying around you can plop the 11sp cassette into. Also, try putting a more pressure in the current tires or mounting a fresh set of GP5ks.
10-31-19, 11:21 AM
#45
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Southern California
Posts: 1,416
Bikes: 2019 Supersix Evo, 2002 Trek 2000
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 273 Post(s)
Liked 45 Times
in
32 Posts
Throw some Aksiums from 2013 on there with 23c tires and pump them up to 120 PSI. Maybe you'll like it better.
