Need new bike: Trek 6500 Disc or Cannondale F400?

Angus · Mar 20, 2006

Hmmm, thats a Tough one, I like the Cannondale for its frame(US made) and the Sram components (compared to the XT-Deore mix on the Trek) I do like the disc brakes and fork on Trek..

If the Cannondale had the lefty I would jump on it but thats me

robdamanii · Mar 20, 2006

Go with the Trek. Disc over non disc is my reasoning.

sanjuro · Mar 20, 2006

That is a super easy one: the F400.

Without going over the entire part spec, the two most important parts of a bike is the frame and the fork.

The F400 frame I suspect will be a little lighter than the Trek 6500, and the quality is definitely higher. Cannondale frames are the highest quality for production bikes, and it does make a difference in the ride.

The Headshok is way better to the Axel Elite. The two most obvious advantages of the Headshok is the air adjustment and the physical lockout (most other forks, including the Axel, has a blowoff lockout, which can be overwhelmed with an out-of-the-saddle effort, defeating the purpose of a fork lockout).

The stiffness and the quality is not so obvious, but both are also vastly superior to the Axel.

The final thing to consider is disc brakes. This is a selling point, which Cannondale does not stock on the F400 to save money. However, I always make this point: rim brakes do an excellent job stopping. Disc brakes have two advantages, better modulation under steep conditions and wet-weather riding. If you do not ride the super steeps or in the rain, then rim brakes are adequate for most situations.

Tenchiro · Mar 20, 2006

Have you thought about getting a bike that is a year old. For $800 you could probably get a much better bike used than new. Plus there will be lots of people upgrading now and a bigger selection to choose from.

Tenchiro · Mar 20, 2006

I like the Trek over the Cannondale personally. Each has advantages over the other so whatever feels right to you I would go with.

bjanga · Mar 20, 2006

Does the Cannondale have a 1.5" headtube?

Personally, I would go with the trek, especially if the C'dale has a 1.5" headtube.

rooftest · Mar 20, 2006

Anyone who says rim brakes are as good as discs is trying to sell you rim brakes. Aren't all Trek frames made in the US, or just the higher end ones?

sanjuro · Mar 20, 2006

rooftest said:
Anyone who says rim brakes are as good as discs is trying to sell you rim brakes. Aren't all Trek frames made in the US, or just the higher end ones?

To be honest, that's true. However, many casual riders do not require disc brakes, which is why I sell it like that.

I believe the cheaper frames are Taiwanese made, but I could be wrong...

robdamanii · Mar 20, 2006

rooftest said:
Anyone who says rim brakes are as good as discs is trying to sell you rim brakes. Aren't all Trek frames made in the US, or just the higher end ones?

Just the higher end ones. But frankly, who cares where they're made? Lots of good things come out of Taiwan.

And it's a 1.5" headtube if the C-dale has the headshock. Nothing like a design that's different from everyone elses that tries to make it as difficult as possible to get rid of their OE.

sanjuro · Mar 20, 2006

robdamanii said:
Just the higher end ones. But frankly, who cares where they're made? Lots of good things come out of Taiwan.

And it's a 1.5" headtube if the C-dale has the headshock. Nothing like a design that's different from everyone elses that tries to make it as difficult as possible to get rid of their OE.

What is wrong with a 1.5 headtube? Can't install a regular, 1 1/8, fork? Nope. Too heavy? Yeah, OK.

Hey, I work on and sell Headshoks all the time, as well as the Axel, Judy, and the MZ-3. The Headshok is way better than those 3 forks, and all you need to do is take one apart to know it.

The biggest downside to a Headshok: cannot resell it except to another C/Dale owner.

robdamanii · Mar 20, 2006

sanjuro said:
What is wrong with a 1.5 headtube? Can't install a regular, 1 1/8, fork? Nope. Too heavy? Yeah, OK.

Hey, I work on and sell Headshoks all the time, as well as the Axel, Judy, and the MZ-3. The Headshok is way better than those 3 forks, and all you need to do is take one apart to know it.

The biggest downside to a Headshok: cannot resell it except to another C/Dale owner.

1.5 means you have a serious limitation in the headset department unless I missed something.

And reselling the fork would be an issue too. I'm not saying it's not a decent fork, but I'm not a fan of the design.

sanjuro · Mar 20, 2006

robdamanii said:
1.5 means you have a serious limitation in the headset department unless I missed something.

And reselling the fork would be an issue too. I'm not saying it's not a decent fork, but I'm not a fan of the design.

Well, there are only 3 1.5 headsets and 2 reducer headsets. You can also use reducer cups, which you then you can use any headset.

I like the Headshok, personally. On the high end, it weighs 2.76 lbs, which is the same weight as the SID World Cup Carbon. But the Headshok is stiff and strong, enough that I know one person who was dirt jumping on one. The low end, there is no comparison, given the quality and the features of the Headshok.

The biggest problem with the Headshok: looks weird, so it is hard to sell.

Changleen · Mar 20, 2006

I would look at other manufacturers personally. I think Trek and Cannondale both suck.

bjanga · Mar 21, 2006

Are you sure you are not planning on doing any trail riding?

Changleen · Mar 21, 2006

imageWIS said:
Who would you suggest?

Jon.

For that sort of money? (~$1000)

http://www.giantbicycles.com/us/030.000.000/030.000.006.asp?model=11265

http://www.specialized.com/bc/SBCBkModel.jsp?spid=12990

Or maybe look at a second hand bike. For $1000 you could probably score a very nice used ride.

sanjuro · Mar 21, 2006

Changleen said:
For that sort of money? (~$1000)

http://www.giantbicycles.com/us/030.000.000/030.000.006.asp?model=11265

http://www.specialized.com/bc/SBCBkModel.jsp?spid=12990

Or maybe look at a second hand bike. For $1000 you could probably score a very nice used ride.

As an informal ranking, my shop sold 4 $500 Rockhoppers (same frame as the model you displayed). My shop sold 4 complete size runs of a $550 F300 (same frame as the F400). We did not prejudice any sale, and I encourage everyone to try both bikes. My customers chose the F300 almost everytime,

Changleen · Mar 21, 2006

sanjuro said:
As an informal ranking, my shop sold 4 $500 Rockhoppers (same frame as the model you displayed). My shop sold 4 complete size runs of a $550 F300 (same frame as the F400). We did not prejudice any sale, and I encourage everyone to try both bikes. My customers chose the F300 almost everytime,

And George Bush is President. Your point is?

I dislike Cannondale for the following reasons:

1) They have a lame corporate image which does not tally with my ideas of MTB, or riding at all. You may agree or disagree with this.

2) They insist on building most of their bikes using very thin walled aluminium tubing. This is retarded for Mountain bikes. There are many ways to achieve the ride that C'dale claim to be after, and pushing a material which work hardens under load cycling to it's limits is dumb, dumb, dumb.
If they used thicker walls it'd be less of an issue, but any impurities or crystaline flaws in the Aluminium will guarantee a seriously weak point in the frame because of the wall thickness. Obviously any impact to the frame also has a much greater chance of compromising it's strength. This is Materials Engineering 101. Believing that the Aluminium they use will always be up to the job is just deluded. Secondly it looks ghey IMO.

3) In all my years of mountain biking, I've never seen a single company have so many broken frames. They are not called crack-n-fail for nothing. This is directly related to point 2.

I dislike Trek because they are bland and boring, and take market share from more interesting innovative companies. They also seem to break quite a bit, and look ghey for the most part.

Just my 0.02c.

sanjuro · Mar 21, 2006

Changleen said:
2) They insist on building most of their bikes using very thin walled aluminium tubing. This is retarded for Mountain bikes. There are many ways to achieve the ride that C'dale claim to be after, and pushing a material which work hardens under load cycling to it's limits is dumb, dumb, dumb.
If they used thicker walls it'd be less of an issue, but any impurities or crystaline flaws in the Aluminium will guarantee a seriously weak point in the frame because of the wall thickness. Obviously any impact to the frame also has a much greater chance of compromising it's strength. This is Materials Engineering 101. Believing that the Aluminium they use will always be up to the job is just deluded.

Your style comments aside, you are saying you build up wall strength to compensate for potential flaws with aluminium? What about eliminating those potential flaws so that you can have a lighter frame?

And I have heard crack=n=fail comments, but in the 3 years I have worked at C/Dale shops, I haven't seen a warranty failure, either from a current model or older, yet. I always wondered was it true years ago or still occuring now...

Changleen · Mar 21, 2006

Yeah, Imagine just a flat sheet of aluminium being hend in tension from both ends. Cycle the loading on the aluminium. Any imperfections are effected by creep and work hardening and develop into cracks and eventually give rise to failure.

Make the sheet thinner. The effect of the defects is magnified as any given defect is a greater percentage of the thickness of the sheet and will lead to quicker manifestation of cracks and tears.

Make the sheet thicker. The effect of the defects is reduced as there is more supporting material around the defect which carries the load.

There is ALWAYS some degree of imperfections. Eliminating the flaws would be great, and I'm sure every tubing manufacturer does all they can to do just that, but it's just not possible to completely eliminate them whilst gravity and economics have anything to do with the refining process. Our best materials for being defect free are the turbines on jet engines, which are made from a slow-grown single crystal of nickle based super-alloy and the silicon we use in computer chips. In the mean time, the thinner the tubing we use, the more prone we are to failure.

You'd also be better off with thin walled steel than thin walled Aluminium alloys as steel doesn't work harden like aluminium does. That's why using thin walled aluminium is especially dumb.

I've seen probably 20ish broken C'Dale frames in LBSs over 15 years, and only a one or two of any other brand. C'Dale definatly stick out in my mind as the brand I've seen fail most. Again, that's my personal experience, but I've seen loads of broken frames in my time an C'Dale just seem extremely over represented.

bjanga · Mar 22, 2006

Fisher?

http://fisherbikes.com/bikes/bike_detail.asp?series=trail-genesis&bike=Piranha

For the price, that looks like a good deal.

Tenchiro · Mar 22, 2006

I have a low end CAAD2 frame from way back in 96 which I rode for a good 8 years and never had so much as a dent. in the frame. I wouldn't put it in any sort of a clamp but mine sure took a beating.

sanjuro · Mar 22, 2006

imageWIS said:
Im no expert, but this is pretty telling:

http://www.cannondale.com/bikes/tech/recall-114903.html

Jon.

Do you know what the Gemini is? It is a downhill bike, designed for big air and extremely rough terrain.

The recall, embarassing as it is, was to protect dh riders from a manufacturing mistake. There were 3 frame breakages occuring from this recall as far as I know, and it was handled well by Cannondale.

Have you done your research on recalls from Specialized, Trek, Giant, and other companies? Because, guess what, they all have recalls!

sanjuro · Mar 22, 2006

Changleen said:
You'd also be better off with thin walled steel than thin walled Aluminium alloys as steel doesn't work harden like aluminium does. That's why using thin walled aluminium is especially dumb.

And where is this thin-walled steel bike in the $1000 pricepoint?

bjanga · Mar 22, 2006

sanjuro said:
And where is this thin-walled steel bike in the $1000 pricepoint?

Jamis, almost:
http://jamisbikes.com/bikes/06_exilexc.html

I would trust Cannondale's frames. I do not like all the proprietary stuff they hang on their frames, though.

If I were you, I think I would go for the fisher. If you still want to spend more money, talk to your LBS about switching out the brakes to avid mechanicals, or about swithing out the fork (marzocchi is my preference).

Changleen · Mar 22, 2006

sanjuro said:
And where is this thin-walled steel bike in the $1000 pricepoint?

Why bother making it thin walled? Just make smaller tubes with a regular wall thickness... There's a reason why most people do just that... :rolleyes:

sanjuro · Mar 22, 2006

Changleen said:
Why bother making it thin walled? Just make smaller tubes with a regular wall thickness... There's a reason why most people do just that...

Because you have a heavier and less stiff frame that way?

bjanga · Mar 22, 2006

Enough. Big, thin walls are stiffer, and dent and fatigue easier. It is a trade-off.

Personally, I recommend going with a slightly less-expensive rig. On the more expensive bikes, you start paying for lighter bars, stems, seatposts, saddles. It might feel good to have the word 'select' on your handlebars, but eventually you are going to going them to say 'thompson'

or you might end up changing them to something that feels more comfortable to you.

The things that matter the most (besides the frame) are the fork, brakes, crankset, wheels, and tires. Everything else (like the seat) comes down to personal preference.
High-end derailleurs shift better, but a mid-end derailleur that has been adjusted properly shifts just fine. Besides, derailleurs get thrashed.

Changleen · Mar 22, 2006

sanjuro said:
Because you have a heavier and less stiff frame that way?

Ultimate stiffness is not something I'd personally look for in a frame... I'd look for a decent geometry first and I prefer the ride of steel to aluminium. Also I'd rather have a frame I was confident I wasn't going to break.

Look, in the end this comes down to personal preference. If you like C'Dale, good for you, feel free to buy their preppie lillywhite borderline homosexual marketed exercises in engineering idiocy. Just don't come crying to me when your frame breaks as you bunnyhop up a curb.

bjanga · Mar 22, 2006

After looking back at the links, ignore all the hot air in my last posts and get the trek.

Changleen · Mar 22, 2006

Ahhh, I love arguing on the internet :love:

bjanga · Mar 22, 2006

Thats why we come here

gemini2k · Mar 22, 2006

theres about 5 different ways for you to install a 1-1/8 fork on a 1.5 heattube. FSA and cane creek make reducing headsets, otherwise e-13 and a few others make reducing cups so you cna put in a regular 1-1/8 headset.

bjanga · Mar 22, 2006

It just requires getting ahold of a new headset and possibly some adaptor thingys. Unnecessary complexity . . .

sanjuro · Mar 22, 2006

Changleen said:
Look, in the end this comes down to personal preference. If you like C'Dale, good for you, feel free to buy their preppie lillywhite borderline homosexual marketed exercises in engineering idiocy. Just don't come crying to me when your frame breaks as you bunnyhop up a curb.

Well, you make a very convincing argument...

Need new bike: Trek 6500 Disc or Cannondale F400?

Chimp

Jack Ass Pen Goo Win

Chimp

OMG! <3 Tom Brady!

Tube Smuggler

Chimp

Attention K Mart Shoppers

Chimp

Attention K Mart Shoppers

Turbo Monkey

Monkey

Tube Smuggler

OMG! <3 Tom Brady!

Tube Smuggler

OMG! <3 Tom Brady!

Tube Smuggler

Paranoid Member

Chimp

Turbo Monkey

Paranoid Member

Tube Smuggler

Paranoid Member

Tube Smuggler

Paranoid Member

Turbo Monkey

Chimp

Attention K Mart Shoppers

Tube Smuggler

Tube Smuggler

Turbo Monkey

Paranoid Member

Tube Smuggler

Turbo Monkey

Paranoid Member

Turbo Monkey

Paranoid Member

Turbo Monkey

Turbo Monkey

Turbo Monkey

Tube Smuggler