TrackSmart

I also like the handling of these bikes (I own a CAAD10 which has identical geometry to the SuperSix). Though I like the stable handling of my gravel bike on rough terrain. So different horses for different courses. That said, I'm guessing the OP doesn't want to have a huge stack of spacers on top of this stem due to the short headtube of such bikes. The consequences of this big stack of spacers range from mild (not pretty) to problematic (not considered safe by the bike maker). I personally think a frame is a better fit if it can be ridden without an enormous stack of spacers. If I were ordering a custom bike it would be designed to fit me with no spacers at all.

[To be clear: I realize that some people may not have the flexibility to be on a standard road bike with no headset spacers. I also think that being able to comfortably ride is more important than whether the bike looks better with fewer spacers. But all other things being equal, see above, and try to avoid buying a bike the requires an excessive amount of spacers when other satisfactory options are available.]

Iride01 

I think you are making a mistake by limiting yourself to bikes marketed as "endurance". Unless you truly need a more relaxed position and want to be more upright.

The terms race and endurance are more about the position you want to be than it is a bike for racing or enduring long rides. Race fit bikes are more than comfortable enough to go on long 100 or 200 mile or even further rides.

waters60

The geometry differences between the CAAD 10 and 2020 Supersix make them not “ identical “ Cannondale changed the frame geometry in the new Supersix, pushing it slightly towards “ endurance “. On my Synapse I had a low stack height, as I wanted to mimic my ‘92 Merckx Century. I had the Supersix set up to be similar to the Synapse, so no “ enormous “ stack of spacers. They are both more “ upright “ than my Merckx but at age 60 that is not a bad thing. It is quite possible to have a 2020 Supersix, be in “ endurance “ territory and enjoy a bike that simply handles better. You don’t need an “ enormous “ stack height to do it. It is the most stable descending bike I have owned in my 45 years of riding.
I also don’t think Cannondale would sell a bike like the Supersix that CAN accommodate stack height if it did not intend people to utilize that possibility.
Try it. You will like it!

Dean V

The issue with the OP is that he is fairly tall with long legs. On an "endurance" bike with more stack than a typical race frame his saddle height is such that he can still get a "race" fit.
I am a bit the same and can easily get 4"+ of saddle/handlebar drop on an endurance frame.

Iride01 

While that is true, I have found that with my 34.5" legs and not so tall height of 71" I still find that bikes advertised as race fit are very comfortable. So to eliminate bike with out trying them is probably overlooking some good ones. While not too aggressive, the race fit SuperSix EVO and Specialized Tarmac are very comfortable. Others too. They are great bikes for long and short rides if the rider isn't wanting a lazy ride.

Plainsman

100% dead on. I don’t feel at all that I have a relaxed fit on my current bike, and many would call it an Endurance type fit. For some race fits, I can’t get enough saddle height with a stock seatpost unless I increase another frame size, which makes me more stretched out (I’m 6’ with a 35.5 or + inseam). Challenge right now is a shortage of bikes to try. I’ve made selections based on my current stack of 603 and reach of 394.

DaveSSS 

With a 73cm saddle height, I get about a 10cm saddle to bar drop with a stack of 527mm, a 15mm headset top, no spacers and a -17 stem. I use a 100mm stem and 80mm reach bars, with a 383mm reach. If I want, just changing to a -6 stem would raise the bars by 2cm. Endurance franes with adequate seat tube length and about the same reach have 2-4cm more stack, so just changing the same stem angle would match some endurance frame's stack and 2cm of spacer would match the tallest stacks, without looking stupid. If I need less than an 8cm saddle to bar drop, I might someday look at an endurance frame. At age 67, I'm not there yet.

Plainsman

You have me curious, I'm going to measure my drop when I get home today. My only reason for using the term "endurance" is the geometry, nothing to do with handling. Oh, but I do want to fit more than 23mm tires for sure, would like to at least be able to go up to 28s, 30+ for the random gravel outing just a bonus. I want to see if my perception of having plenty of drop is reality. FWIW, my bike is set up currently with a full compliment of spacers, so I'm curious to see what drop comes out to. I spent almost a decade in the aero position on a tri bike and always test on the extremely flexible end of any flexibility test, so we'll see. Will post numbers.

Plainsman

Just checked, I have over 10 cm of drop with 40mm of spacers (max allowable by my steerer), on a semi-endurance geometry (Scott CR1). My saddle height is 81.5-82cm.

DaveSSS 

The super six does not have the extra stack height of an endurance bike. If that's needed, then you'd end up with lots of spacers and a higher rise stem.

https://www.cannondale.com/en-us/bik...force-etap-axs

TrackSmart

I mean no offense, but you are only correct to a degree here. First, you are correct that I was thinking of this series of bikes as a whole rather than the revised 2020 model. The SuperSix and CAAD10/12 series have traditionally been on the racy end of the spectrum with relatively short stack and headtubes for a given size. That said, your comments are a bit exaggerated. While slightly slacker in geometry, it remains a relatively racy fit compared to many "endurance" bikes in 2020.

I just looked at the geometry chart for the new SuperSix (2020), my CAAD10, and the Canyon Endurace ("endurance" bike). The new SuperSix is marginally more slack than my CAAD10, but we are only talking 5 - 10 mm in stack height for a comparable size or reach. Contrast that the the Canyon Endurace, which at similar reach measurements to the SuperSix has about 2.5-3 cm more stack height. That is what the OP is looking for in a bike, due to his dimensions. The SuperSix would require another 3cm of spacers on the bike (on top of the number he would need for the "endurance" frames that have taller stack height). That might be more that is safely recommended. And it wouldn't add to the sleek looks of the bike either.

[EDIT: Also, yeah, I clearly second the comment right above which I hadn't seen yet.]

Sy Reene

If not already mentioned, you could check out the Felt VR models, if you're looking for a high stack to reach ratio. Their 105 model is listed at 18.5 lbs, their Ultegra at 17.2 lbs.
Also, fun to play with if you have a few models you want to compare:
https://99spokes.com/compare?bikes=f...dvanced-1-2021

Plainsman

Thanks, will do!

sfrider 

My Cervelo C3 weighs just under 18 lbs out the door minus water bottle. It has 8cm of saddle to bar drop.
My Canyon Ultimate weighs about half a pound less, at 17.5 lbs out the door minus water bottle. It has 17cm of bar drop.

The weight difference is not really significant. Everything else on the bikes matters a whole lot more.

Plainsman

I do believe that to a degree - 17.5 vs 18, meh - 18 vs 20, yes. Does anyone know if there is somewhere that tracks and records frame weights? If one wanted to start with a frame (or buy, strip, and start over), that would be good information.

DaveSSS 

Let's say you have 9cm more saddle height than I do. That means a frame stack height around 600, with a 15mm headset top like I use and a -6 stem should give you about a 10cm saddle to bar drop, with NO spacers. A 580 frame stack would require about 20mm of spacer. A little more stem angle would reduce the drop a little more.

As for frame weights, keep in mind that the largest sizes will always weigh more. My cheapest model Colnago frame in the third from smallest size weighs about 1200 grams and fork about 400. Since I have rim brakes, the whole bike comes in at 7.3Kg, with no pedal or cages and Campy Chorus or SRAM Force AXS. Disc would probably add 400 grams. I can't imagine any decent frame weighing in over 1500. That would put a large frame with discs real close to 8kg, or under 18 lbs.

Plainsman

Thanks, but I’m not sure I understand the math. My current frame has over 600mm of stack (603 or 4), and it’s taking me 4cm of spacers to reduce my drop to 10cm?

DaveSSS 

what length of hadset top is being used and what stem angle?

I measure the drop from the floor to top of saddle and bars. If the bike's on a level floor, a carpenter's level can be placed on the saddle and extended above the bars.

Plainsman

I really appreciate the feedback everyone has given me on this thread so far. Just to close the loop - I've since had a professional bike fit in order to determine what type of frame geometry best fits my physiology and level of flexibility. When it was all said and done, it turns out I can get plenty aggressive in what most would consider endurance geometry, and would need a lot of spacers on most race geometry bikes just to avoid being "too" aggressive. Using the data for a Giant Defy for example, I can use 20mm of spacers under the stem and I still get a not-to-shabby saddle to bar drop of roughly 13 and a half cm. Achieving a good aggressive position on an endurance geometry will be pretty easy, with room to get lower if I want, or to be less aggressive for longer and rougher rides. With the race geometry we tried (Like a TCR), I get very low from the starting position, and the only way to lessen that is to stack spacers to the point they aren't very pleasing to the eye. Based on body type, endurance geo doesn't = "relaxed" fit for me, but rather a good riding position for the type of events I want to do, with the ability to get into a more aggressive position similar to what others would have on race geo frames. I sort of think branding frames as endurance vs race is a disservice, as the proportions of the rider have as much or more to do with the fit as does the frame itself. Now, to find an endurance frame that looks good and doesn't weigh a ton! Light, attractive, affordable - pick 2! ;-)

DaveSSS 

Don't forget stem angle when adjusting bar height. Adding spacers is not the only option. I need no spacers with a -17 stem. Changing to a -6 raises the bars by 2cm. Flipping that stem to a +6 would add another 2cm. The flipped up stem isn't real pretty, but I now see some top level aerodynamic frames with one piece bar/stem combinations with a substantial upward rise being used in this year's tour.

TrackSmart

I'm glad you came to a satisfying conclusion to your decision-making process. 13.5cm of drop is definitely an aggressive position (in my book anyway) for non-racers.

I think the folks who kept talking about race-style frames seemed to forget that different proportions = very different fits on the same bike. When you told us already that you were running the maximum number of spacers on your semi-endurance frame and still had 10cm of drop, it was pretty obvious that a bike with a super-short headtube would not be the best choice to match your desired bike position. Sure, you can run lots of spacers and a positive-rise stems on a "race" frame, but why would you do this if you can find a frame that can be made to fit without such extreme measures (and have it look sleeker, too)?

Enjoy your time bike shopping! Next year's models should be around the corner, so inventory on all the sizes will hopefully be easier to come by soon.