Cannondale or Casati - Taking the plunge!

albino_scruff

Hi everyone,

I'm new to the forum and would really appreciate some advice. I'm taking the plunge and getting a road bike. I am a seasoned mountain biker but would like to start riding faster and further on the road. My budget is around £1200-£1400 and I will typcally ride around 30-40 miles but have my eye set on a few routes up to 100.

I'm 6'2" and weigh around 88kg (190lbs) and Ive been looking at the cannondale caad 10 with 105 and synapse 105 with 58cm frames. To throw a spanner in the works the bike shop has offered to build up a Casati Vinci with either 105 or Sram apex. I haven't been able to find out too much about the casati but it's seems like a pretty respected small scale manufacturer. The Vinci frame is aluminium with carbon fork and rear carbon wishbone stays.

I'm really torn as to which I should go for.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

Cheers

scruff

TMR

I know nothing about the other brand mentioned, but the two Cannondale frames you mentioned have completely different geometries. The Synapse is more comfortable for Sportives, whereas the CAAD 10 is for racing. Which you choose between them depends what you want the bike for.

albino_scruff

I am leaning towards the sportive orientated geometry so I have a little more flexibility and comfort for longer rides.

TMR

Then the Synapse would be my recommendation.

huuregeil

Casatis are gorgeous bikes!!! This is a no-brainer surely?! The geometry is a red herring, it either fits or it doesn't. And the vinci is really sensibly spec'ed (e.g. mudguard mounts) - it looks a great bike to me.

PhilofCas

Don't think you'll go wrong with either, mate of mine got a Casati Vinci Veloce spec (for his winter bike) and loves it, we're all out on our summer bikes and even though he has a Pina' Prince he's still riding the Casati, now that says a lot to me that.

giant_man

Casati are waaaaay different from your common or garden Cannondale tbh, lovely Italian marque that aren't very common but very desirable, that's my recommendation .....

TMR

giant mancp wrote:

Casati are waaaaay different from your common or garden Cannondale tbh, lovely Italian marque that aren't very common but very desirable, that's my recommendation .....

In what way are they 'waaaaay different'?

TMR

huuregeil wrote:

The geometry is a red herring, it either fits or it doesn't.

The geometry is not a red herring - don't confuse fit and geometry. A rider can 'fit' a racing geo which is more stretched out and aero, and 'fit' a Sportive geo , which is more upright and comfortable.

That aside, geo differences, and to an equal degree, frame design differences can alter the ride quality significantly.

giant_man

They are made in Italy for a start and they are Italian, how much more different do you want? Cannondale are made in the Far East. Like I said, they are 'waaaay different.

TMR

giant mancp wrote:

They are made in Italy for a start and they are Italian, how much more different do you want? Cannondale are made in the Far East. Like I said, they are 'waaaay different.

Hmmm...

I am unconvinced that makes any difference whatsoever.

giant_man

You would see - and feel - the difference if you rode them both.

TMR

giant mancp wrote:

You would see - and feel - the difference if you rode them both.

Of course you would, they are different bikes. The difference is design, not geographical location of construction.

giant_man

You're partly right but not quite, try harder next time there's a good chap eh?

albino_scruff

I'm right in thinking that the synapse alloy frameset has carbon rear stays as well. So in terms of the technology both framesets have a carbon fork and some carbon technology in the rear. Im just struggling at the moment with the idea of spending between 400 and 500 pounds more for the casati plus it will more than likely have to be built up with sram apex instead of 105 to keep the costs down.

I haven't bought a bike for around 12 years or so so its a really big decision to make!

TMR

giant mancp wrote:

You're partly right but not quite, try harder next time there's a good chap eh?

Don't patronise me. I'm not partly right, I'm completely right. Either post well formed arguments or don't bother.

TMR

albino_scruff wrote:

I'm right in thinking that the synapse alloy frameset has carbon rear stays as well. So in terms of the technology both framesets have a carbon fork and some carbon technology in the rear. Im just struggling at the moment with the idea of spending between 400 and 500 pounds more for the casati plus it will more than likely have to be built up with sram apex instead of 105 to keep the costs down.

I haven't bought a bike for around 12 years or so so its a really big decision to make!

For your budget, you should be able to get a full carbon Synapse.

huuregeil

The Mad Rapper wrote:

huuregeil wrote:

The geometry is a red herring, it either fits or it doesn't.

The geometry is not a red herring - don't confuse fit and geometry. A rider can 'fit' a racing geo which is more stretched out and aero, and 'fit' a Sportive geo , which is more upright and comfortable.

That aside, geo differences, and to an equal degree, frame design differences can alter the ride quality significantly.

With respect I think you're confusing fit and geometry. The position you are in (or should be in) is independent of the frame you're on - it's a function of your body and riding style. Whether or not a given frame permits this, and with what set of compromises, is a separate issue. "Racing geometry" and "Sportive geometry" are meaningless terms.

wildmoustache

Black CAAD 10 is an incredibly boring looking bike. But people say it's great and I'm willing to believe that.

I don't like the C'dale geo but you might differ.

TMR

huuregeil wrote:

With respect I think you're confusing fit and geometry. The position you are in (or should be in) is independent of the frame you're on - it's a function of your body and riding style. Whether or not a given frame permits this, and with what set of compromises, is a separate issue. "Racing geometry" and "Sportive geometry" are meaningless terms.

With respect, I don't think I am. If you think about Pro riders, the position they adopt on their time trial bike is completely different to the position they adopt on their race bike. They are fitted to each, but in completely different positions.

There is no such thing as a single 'fit' position, there is a 'fit' position that's right for any person on any frame that's the right size for them, regardless of the geo.

wildmoustache

The Mad Rapper wrote:

huuregeil wrote:

With respect I think you're confusing fit and geometry. The position you are in (or should be in) is independent of the frame you're on - it's a function of your body and riding style. Whether or not a given frame permits this, and with what set of compromises, is a separate issue. "Racing geometry" and "Sportive geometry" are meaningless terms.

With respect, I don't think I am. If you think about Pro riders, the position they adopt on their time trial bike is completely different to the position they adopt on their race bike. They are fitted to each, but in completely different positions.

There is no such thing as a single 'fit' position, there is a 'fit' position that's right for any person on any frame that's the right size for them, regardless of the geo.

The statement above in bold is false. It's entirely possible for the geometry of a frameset not to fit to a person, no matter what size and what stems, bars etc. they use.

TMR

wildmoustache wrote:

The statement above in bold is false. It's entirely possible for the geometry of a frameset not to fit to a person, no matter what size and what stems, bars etc. they use.

Perhaps I should have added ' as long as the geo is not bizarre'. Point accepted.

wildmoustache

The Mad Rapper wrote:

wildmoustache wrote:

The statement above in bold is false. It's entirely possible for the geometry of a frameset not to fit to a person, no matter what size and what stems, bars etc. they use.

Perhaps I should have added ' as long as the geo is not bizarre'. Point accepted.

Actually it's more than that. Two examples - tall headtubes and slack seat tubes with proprietary seatposts with layback. Not uncommon at all.

TMR

wildmoustache wrote:

Actually it's more than that. Two examples - tall headtubes and slack seat tubes with proprietary seatposts with layback. Not uncommon at all.

I don't accept that a tall head tube would prevent a good fit as long as the frame is the right size for the individual (taking into account their trunk length and leg length proportions), but I can see how a proprietary seat post might.

huuregeil

The Mad Rapper wrote:

There is no such thing as a single 'fit' position, there is a 'fit' position that's right for any person on any frame that's the right size for them, regardless of the geo.

Yes, quite - fit is a function of body and riding style. Change the style change the position. But the right size and the right geometry are not independent. I get a racing fit on bikes with tall headtubes, because I've got extremely long legs. These frames might be considered "sportive geometry" by some people ("Belgian" by others!) - a "racing geometry" from some manufacturers will never fit me. This is a binary decision.

In other words, advising the OP to get the sportive geometry frame because he's riding sportives is silly. The question is, what's an appropriate position for the OP to be in given he's riding for pleasure and not racing, and which of those three frames allow that position to be attained. That's an impossible call to make over the internet.

wildmoustache

The Mad Rapper wrote:

wildmoustache wrote:

Actually it's more than that. Two examples - tall headtubes and slack seat tubes with proprietary seatposts with layback. Not uncommon at all.

I don't accept that a tall head tube would prevent a good fit as long as the frame is the right size for the individual (taking into account their trunk length and leg length proportions), but I can see how a proprietary seat post might.

A tall headtube certainly can. If you've been cycling competively for a long time (as I have) and run a short HT then a high HT is inefficient, and feels slow and uncomfortable - putting a lot of weight on the arms. You can run a negative rise stem but there is a limit to how low that will get you. Admittedly this is not a problem most people, and certainly not most people on this board, are ever likely to encounter.

Seat tube and post is likely to be a more common problem.

huuregeil

wildmoustache wrote:

The statement above in bold is false. It's entirely possible for the geometry of a frameset not to fit to a person, no matter what size and what stems, bars etc. they use.

+1 exactly.

simonaspinall

I've not ridden a cannondale but can vouch for my casati 105 - Very smooth, sportivey geometry, can take full guards. My only complaint is that the head tube is a bit tall as I would like something a bit more aggressive, but that's my problem, not the bikes.

I am sooooooo tempted by the cannondale for my next bike - Only thing stopping me is that it doesn't take full guards and it isn't available in more zany colours (would really like the liquigas colours)

The one thing I would say is that the Casati is bought from Racescene who will do a complete fitting service on a jig and it can be specced to your budget which you may not get with the Cannondale (well, depending on where you purchase it from and how used you are to setting a bike up)

To the OP, it is difficult to find anyone with a bad word to say about either brand so you'd be pretty safe whichever you choose, it just depends on whether you want full guards and if you would like aggressive or more relaxed geometry.

Aggressive - Cannondale (But then the Storck did very nicely in the Bikeradar Bike of the year for the same price bracket)

Relaxed - Casati. The customer service is first rate at Racescene so I think you'd get very good value.