Please activate JavaScript!
Please install Adobe Flash Player, click here for download

TOUR QTR 4-2011

The most important test of the year: TOUR compares 26 carbon frames from the best companies in three sizes each

Cannondale 2.2 Canyon 1.4 Cube 1.9 Fuji 2.2 • sold online 48 1.39 56 1.41 63 1.58 50 1.38 58 1.47 64 1.56 53 1.35 58 1.41 62 1.48 44 1.36 53 1.43 58 1.46 manufacturer model Web price frameset fork headset equipment/extras seatpost diameter bottom bracket type geometry frame sizes (company’s data)1) seat tube-/head tube angle seat-/top-/head tube length wheelbase/trail stack/reach/STR seating position by frame size2) frame size STR measured data weight frame/fork/headset3) standardized weight frameset4) steering rigidity lateral fork stiffness bottom bracket shell rigidity frame comfort (shock absorption) fork comfort (shock absorption) STW-value5) evaluation weight frameset 25% ride stability 15% lateral fork stiffness 15% power transmission 10% frame comfort 10% fork comfort 10% paint’s impact resistance 5% finish 5% instruction manual 2.5%6) guarantee 2.5%7) final grade 100% footnotes 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) see page 50. Grades: 1 = Very good, 2 = Good, 3 = Satisfactory, 4 = Sufficient, 5 = FailING German PRICES, the price in your country may vary Super Six Hi Mod www.cannondale.com € 2999 / $ 4318 / £ 2630 Cannondale Super Six C'dale, top 1-1/8”, bottom 1.5” 31.6 mm BB30 48, 50, 52, 54, 56, 58, 60, 63 cm 73.5°/73.5° 570/560/155 mm 990/53 mm 560/396 mm/1.41 1035/406/87 g 1533 g - 3.38 lbs 86 Nm/degree 62 N/mm 59 N/mm 297 N/mm 113 N/mm 81 Nm/degree•kg 2.3 2.3 1.0 1.3 2.7 5.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 87 grams - 0.2 lbs heavier than in last year’s test, which can be ex- plained by the white paint job, since last year’s frame was black. The only average rigidity we measured was unexpected, the large volume tubing suggested better stiffness values. What also doesn’t make sense is why the 48 cm - 18.9” frame has much more head tube rigidity than the 56 cm - 22”, while the 63 cm - 24.8” frame only reaches 81 Nm/degree. Ultimate CF SLX EVO www.canyon.com € 1699 / $ 2477 / £ 1490 Canyon One One Four Acros, top 1-1/4”, bottom 1.5” stem, seatpost 27.2 mm BSA 50, 52, 54, 56, 58, 60, 62, 64 cm 73.5°/73.5° 570/565/171 mm 990/58 mm 581/395 mm/1.47 941/329/61 g 1349 g - 2.97 lbs 97 Nm/degree 62 N/mm 67 N/mm 140 N/mm 78 N/mm 101 Nm/degree•kg 1.7 1.3 1.0 1.0 1,0 3.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 The phenomenon from Koblenz, al- ways at the forefront, has never been as good as it is this year. The new seatpost made of carbon and basalt fibers elevates comfort at the saddle to a new level. One characteristic of the frame has remained the same: its technical, businesslike appearance. Examples for this are the asymmetri- cal seat tube and the headset cups made of injection-molded plastic, which save a few more grams. Litening Super HPC Blackline www.cube.eu € 2199 / $ 3167 / £ 1928 Easton EC90 SL FSA, top 1-1/8”, bottom 1.5” seatpost 31.6 mm Press-fit 50, 53, 56, 58, 60, 62 cm 73.5°/73.5° 540/560/158 mm 990/53 mm 557/394 mm/1.41 1067/408/82 g 1572 g - 3.47 lbs 95 Nm/degree 50 N/mm 62 N/mm 161 N/mm 124 N/mm 86 Nm/degree•kg 2.3 1.3 1.7 1.0 1.0 5.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 Its final grade improved a full five tenths compared to last year’s grade point average. More lateral stability in the fork helped to achieve this leap forward, as did the new, com- fortable seatpost, designed by Syn- tace. Other positive points are the frame’s outstanding finish and up- to-date details like the Press-fit bottom bracket and the conical fork shaft. Weight and fork comfort could still be improved. Altamira 1.0 www.fujibikes.de € 1699 / $ 2447 / £ 1490 Fuji FSA, top 1-1/8”, bottom 1.5” 31.6 mm Press-fit 44, 47, 50, 53, 55, 58 cm 73.5°/73.5° 530/560/161 mm 985/52 mm 564/395 mm/1.43 1009/451/85 g 1566 g - 3.45 lbs 88 Nm/degree 48 N/mm 60 N/mm 230 N/mm 114 N/mm 84 Nm/degree•kg 2.3 2.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 5.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 3.0 A voluminous down tube, a laterally oval top tube whose profile tapers towards the rear and thin seatstays - Fuji doesn’t miss a trick. The Alta- mira offers a solid frame and techni- cal values which promise good han- dling characteristics. There’s nothing to complain about concerning the workmanship and finish either. With a lighter, more comfortable fork an even better result would have been possible. T01_11_EN_074_084_Rahmtest_Einzel.indd 76 25.08.2011 10:18:04 Uhr