Lombard

The elephant you refer to is a paper elephant. The bottom line is which bike do YOU like better when YOU ride it. That's the one you should buy......that is if the bike feels any better than your Optimo.

Jughed

By definition - if it's not the top tier, its lower tier than the top tier. That is not a knock on quality - it's a flat true statement.

And me stating my opinion that high(er) tier aluminum frames are as good or better than many of the low(er) tier CF frames - that isn't a knock on CF frames.

When you are comparing 105 or less equipped bikes - you are not typically getting the best CF frames of that model line, so you are getting lower tier frames.

And the second statement was my entire point - and in response to a question posed by the OP. It was not a knock on frames or materials.

SoSmellyAir

mstateglfr A01082919 By a lifestyle bike I mean having certain ready-to-ride features that might have more mass appeal (i.e., pre-wired SmartSense lights and rear radar). Nothing to do with geometry and my label does not preclude overlap with the category generally referred to as endurance bikes. So my label only applies to the current generation CF Synapse released at the end of 2022 / early 2023.

NumbersGuy

And what if the a manufacturer's highest tier aluminum bike still resides on a lower tier than their non-top tier carbon bikes? You can't just break two completely different things into what you want to deem highest tier and low(er) tier and have a valid comparison. That's like saying a high end flip phone is better than an iPhone 14 because the iPhone isn't a 14 Pro Max.

SoSmellyAir

I bought a 2016 model in early 2017, so I think we have the same generation; does yours also have the "power pyramid," i.e., a seat tube with a split base at its junction with the bottom bracket? This design makes that junction stiffer. In the next generation, this feature is only on the Hi-Mod version. So we both bought a Synapse at the right time!

Lombard

Yup, that's the one I got! Mine is a 2014 which was the first year with that design. It certainly catches the eye, but does the "power pyramid" really have a purpose or is it just aesthetic?

Interrlestingly, I've heard reports of problems with creaky BB30 BB's. I'm lucky mine is still silent at 16K miles.

SoSmellyAir

It is supposed to, and theoretically could, improve lateral stiffness.

Me too, so touch wood here too.

Lombard

Sounds gimmicky to me. How can removing material improve latertal stiffness? Granted the lateral stiffness on this frame is quite good, but I'm not convinced it's from the "power pyramid". I'm thinking it's from carbon layup, frame shaping and the tapered steerer.

Another thing that was promoted about this frame was the shape of the chain stays which they claimed helped with compliance. I'm not sure there is any real world validity to that either.

SoSmellyAir

But this design does not remove materials from the base of the seat tube. Compare (A) the combined cross sections of the split seat tubes to (B) the cross section of a normal seat tube, at a point right above the bottom bracket. The total perimeter of (A) and (B) are about the same. So what this design does is take two pieces of CF that would extend laterally in a regular seat tube (and thus cover the "holes" in the "power pyramid" design) and arrange them longitudinally instead, closer to the left and right sides of the seat tube and leaving a hole in the middle. Thus, this design puts more of the footprint and materials toward the outside of the bike frame, which can at least theoretically increase lateral stiffness.

Both the chain stays and seat stays are shaped with flattened portion, and it is well known that the cross section of a tube can potentially affect its flexibility. But of course the same can be accomplished via the CF layup.

shelbyfv

Interesting that the CAAD13 is one of the last Cannondales with a press fit BB.

SoSmellyAir

Because it is an older frame than both the Synapse and the SuperSix EVO 4. CAAD14 will probably have a threaded BB.

A01082919

Which one is the better option man?

Lombard

Did you test ride both bikes? Which one did you like better?

Jughed

He has a good point - can't make a blanket statement about this vs that, and that wasn't my intention.

In terms of Cannondale, Trek, Specialized and some others - they make very good, high end aluminum frames. Very good bikes. They also make some lower grade examples of CF bikes, and IMHO, some of their lower grade CF bikes are overpriced and offer no real advantage over their top end aluminum offerings.

Another good point was made - you are comparing an endurance bike to a race bike...

Race bike to race bike - typically you can get the 105 equipped AL frame for 1-2k less than the 105(or less) equipped CF frame. Weight difference will be 4-6 oz +/-. Out of the box performance and ride quality will be +/- the same.

But - with the AL bike you have an additional 1-2k of money to play with. Decent wheel set, bars, tires, seat post... now you have a faster and lighter bike for +/- the same money.

If you compare the AL to some of the higher spec CF frames - you even have more money to play with for higher end upgrades - and you can have a bike of similar weight/performance for less money.

As non racers, 30 seconds or a few min here or there over the course of an hour ride or climb - CF frames really offer little advantage over any other frame. Really, we buy them because we like them - not because they really make a difference one way or another.

NumbersGuy

The one that fits you the best and you like the look and feel of is the better option. The point many of us are trying to make to you is that making a blanket statement about what is better won't be factual or helpful. Each option has pros and cons but certainly the differences aren't going to dramatically change your riding experience, and neither is likely to make a tremendous difference versus your current bike. The weight differences between all 3 will be marginal in the overall rider+bike+equipment system weight.

It sounds like you're thinking that upgrading the bike is going to make a significant change in your speed and I think you're going to be disappointed when the reality is a marginal change. Invest is some nicer components of your choice (I'd start with tires), a training plan, and maybe nice apparel/accessories and you'll probably see a better return in performance and enjoyment in your riding than you will by making an upgrade to either of those bikes.

SoSmellyAir

Your question is like asking whether you should have the second most expensive steak or the third most expensive lobster at a fancy restaurant. If you like or want steak more, steak is the better choice. If you like or want lobster more, lobster is the better choice.

Jrasero

For me CAAD13 but it really prefers on your geometry preference. I personally don't find the CAAD13 to be that aggressive like the Allez Sprint but I do find 105 upgrade path wise to be a ton better and with a CAAD13 I wouldn't be afraid if I laid it down. Cannondale Synapse Carbon 4 BTW weighs 21lbs so IMO you really gain nothing for going carbon besides maybe a tad bit of comfort but I think the 30c tires of the Synapse really are doing the heavy lifting comfort wise anyways. The CAAD13 weighs 19.9lbs and IMO if you wanted to upgrade down the line if this is a long term bike, the CAAD13 makes more sense since you could drop a lot of weight with a new wheelset, carbon parts, or upgrading the groupset

Jrasero

For me the CAAD13 us a NY Strip and the Synapse is like a Ribeye but totally overcooked and drowned in a terrible demi glaze. Point being, just because a cut of meat technically is better doesn't mean it tastes better, it all comes down to the whole package and IMO while the CAAD13 uses a less "premium" material it's hands down the better bike

A01082919

Hello everyone,

Thank you all for your opinion in helping me make the decision.

I went into store and I looked at the two bikes. I looked at the paint job, style and everything about it. It’s a no brainer, the Synapse carbon 4 is the clear victor. The CAAD13 105 paint job looked cheap and the welds were’t attractive. When comparing the frames, there’s barely any difference in geometry. Regardless of materials that are better or worst, carbon is still carbon, aluminum is aluminum. I simply wanted a carbon bike more than I did an aluminum the benefits didn’t out weight each other so it came down to preference. Is carbon cooler than aluminum? Yeah its lighter, trending and looks better imo. Regardless if it’s not the best carbon, the there’s enough testing done throughout the decade so I trust that it’s not made out of toilet paper. I also read that carbon can be repaired whereas aluminum cannot (another plus).

The aesthetic when comparing in person is day and night.
I got both bikes at 50% off MSRP, but rather than return one of them, I switched out the CAAD13 Shimano 105’s group set onto my Synapse, and my CAAD13 now has my Tiagra. Then sold my CAAD13 with tiagra at cost, so I got a free groupset upgrade on my synapse. I will fork out $200-300 for the swap, but because the $2000 savings I already did, losing 200-300 is chump change. I am looking at upgrading the seat and a larger cassette for the purpose of turning this thing into my climbing machine!

Thanks again everyone! Appreciate you all!

shelbyfv

Pics please!

NumbersGuy

Sounds like you made a great choice and got a bike that you're excited about. Nice move buying both and swapping the 105 onto your Synapse. Congrats and enjoy the new bike.

ussprinceton

I've owned 3 CAAD10s before, so I'm biased towards CAADs

shelbyfv

Never got the pics....

ussprinceton

Lombard

Never got the reply to my question below:

The OP hasn't been here since April 13. Just sayin'.