PINKBIKE FIELD TEST
Cannondale Scalpel SE 1
Words by Mike Levy, photography by Margus Riga
Calling a bike a "scalpel" is a well-worn way to say that it's a fast and sharp handling ride, which is sorta the definition of a cross-country bike. But Cannondale has been offering the real Scalpel since way back in 2001 when it debuted as a focused, sharp bike made for, you guessed it, cross-country racing. The newest 100mm-travel Scalpel continues to fill that role, but the version I tested gets a bump up to 120mm on both ends, a dropper post, and more relaxed geometry.
There are only two Scalpel SE models to choose from, the $4,000 SE 2 and my grey test bike, the $5,500 USD SE 1. That gets you an XT drivetrain, RockShox’s SID Select+ RL fork and SIDluxe shock, as well as Cannondale’s alloy Hollowgram cranks and carbon fiber rims.
Scalpel SE 1 Details• Travel: 120mm rear / 120mm fork
• Carbon frame
• Wheel size: 29"
• Head Angle: 67°
• Seat Tube Angle: 74°
• Reach: 450mm (large)
• Chainstay length: 436mm
• Sizes: S, M, LRG (tested), XLRG
• Weight: 25.27lb / 11.46kg
• Price: $5,500 USD
•
www.cannondale.com That adds up to 25.27lb, including the Schwalbe control tires that were installed on every bike. At 67-degrees, the SE 1 is a degree slacker up front than the race bike, and the seat angle is half a degree more relaxed at 74-degrees. My large-size bike sports a modest 450mm reach and a not so modest 480mm seat tube.
Cannondale has a long history of doing things their way, and while the Scalpel is a relatively conventional bike by their standards, there's no way it was going out the factory doors without being just a little bit different from everyone else. Check out the flex-zone at the rear axle; many bikes use engineered flex back there, but Cannondale's employed a wide, flat section of carbon to act as the bending point where there'd otherwise be sealed bearings. This is said to mimic the action of a Horst Link pivot for more active, better suspension performance, and the flex occurs at a precise location smack dab in the middle of the flat bit.
The downbeat grey paint (that I do like) seems to hide some neat details on the rest of the frame, including the massive box-section chainstays and captive main pivot. This thing looks beefy, and Cannondale says that a frame and shock weigh in at 1,900-grams. Another detail that's hard to spot: The bike's offset drivetrain. Everything sits 6mm to the right compared to other bikes, with the idea being that it provides more tire clearance and makes for a stiffer package. It does mean that the rear-wheel needs to be dished slightly differently than usual, although that's possible to apply to most wheels.
Cable routing is internal, and there’s a clever open non-drive-side dropout so you don’t even have to pull the axle out to remove the wheel. Remember, this is the same frame as the race-focused Scalpel, so it gets the same race-focused dropout. Given the choice, who here actually wants to wear a backpack? Or any pack at all? Cannondale’s solution is a pint-sized Fabric multi-tool, Dynaplug’s lightweight tire plug kit, and a CO2 all ready for you by the side of your bottle cage. If you need the tool, you just pull the rubber band and it pops right out. And like any good cross-country bike, there's room for two bottles inside the front triangle.
ClimbingMy lineup of test bikes shows there are at least five different ways to get the job done, with each of them having some distinct pros and cons that make them very different on the trail. In the case of the SE 1, its best asset has to be its climbing abilities, and it's especially adept at the slow, methodical jumbly stuff. I'm picturing those perfectly ill-placed rocky steps spaced just close enough to test your timing and the bike's traction, or maybe your usually simple spin to the top has more in common with a greased up telephone pole than singletrack after a recent downpour. Whatever the challenge, the SE 1, along with the Yeti SB115, seem to claw their way up with a bit more persistence than the other bikes, a trait that always wins me over if I'm honest.
The Scalpel's spider monkey impressions are surely helped by two factors: It's a relatively compact bike, and its active-feeling suspension seems to give the Schwalbe Racing Ralph rear tire superpowers. Remember, all of them were fitted with the same rubber, and I used a digital gauge to ensure tire pressures matched for each day's back-to-back laps. Given the even fight, the Scalpel spun out fewer times than the other bikes in the slippery conditions, and I dabbed less while riding it.
Does active suspension mean a slow bike? Not on the Cannondale, as it had the second-quickest total loop time, all of which was gained on the way up. It was the second-quickest bike over the entire climb, but it made up even more time on the trickier, steeper technical section near the summit where it was basically 8-percent quicker than the other four. I'll admit that it didn't
feel quicker on the way up, as I don't think our brains equate a slightly more forgiving ride with more speed, but that's what clocks are for.
Descending
Might as well get down to it: The Scalpel SE 1 can't match the Revel, Transition, or Specialized on the descents, and the more the trail angles down, the larger the gap. To be fair to Cannondale, the SE was never meant to keep up with a bike like the Spur in the same way the SB115 wasn't; they're looking at the challenge from opposite angles, so it's no surprise to end up with opposing results.
Some good stuff first. A friend of mine built this amazing trail atop a desert mesa in Utah, and it always impressed me how he was able to shoehorn what feels like roughly 150 miles of singletrack into an area the size of a football field. It's almost maddening how many times you zig and zag tightly to see the same cactus that jabbed you an hour ago while on a different section of the same trail. It's tight as hell, but there's flow to be found on the short, sharp descents. This is where bikes like Scalpel SE 1 and the SB 115 like to live, a place where the speeds don't reach eye-watering levels, regardless of if its a slow, technical downhill or if you've managed to find some elusive desert flow. It is out there.
But the eyes start to tear up right around the same time the Scalpel begins to feel a bit short and pointy. When the ground is rough and steep, it just doesn't have that calmness where the bike almost seems to float invisibly under you as it deals with the rocks and roots. Instead, the SE can get flustered when said rocks come hard and fast and, ironically given the praise I heaped on it above, lose traction sooner than you'd prefer. I also have to point out the 480mm long seat tube that doesn't leave you with enough room to use a long-travel dropper post, a minus that can be traced back to this being the same frame as the race bike.
Some context: Both the SE1 and SB115 really would leave the four race-focused bikes (
Sarah Moore reviewed those last week) wondering which way they went on every kind of descent, no doubt there.
Speaking of intentions, we never set out to break anything, but sometimes that's exactly what happens. This time around, the SE's Hollowgram carbon fiber rear rim was a victim of my crappy line choice, maybe a bit too much speed, and the rather light-duty Racing Ralph rear tire that'll never be the same. Sure, more pressure might have prevented the knife-like rock from being fatal, but I hadn't been rolling the sidewall or burping the tire, so who knows. Anyway, here's Cannondale's response in full: ''
We are glad to see Mike enjoying the new Scalpel SE and putting its capability to the test. We agree with Mike that the combination of tire pressure, rowdiness, and an untimely rock strike exceeded the durability of the rim (which is considerable). While this is not technically covered under our warranty, we evaluate each situation and in this case, the wheel would be replaced to get the rider back on the trail with as quickly as possible.''
Every bike has its strengths and weaknesses, and it's no surprise to see the SE 1's is its climbing ability. Yeah, that means that it's not as exciting as the Spur or Ranger, but it'll better suit many cross-country riders who want more bike but don't need something so focused on descending.
221 Comments
Want to use another wheel in your bike while you wait? whoops, offset hub and drivetrain. Time to get the spoke keys out again.
Takes a lot to break carbon and the AL rims on most stock wheels aren't that great, so it was a fair speculation.
My xm481s seem to laugh off impacts that have broken carbon.
Also, what details do you have to divulge when warranteeing? "I was just riding along when..."
IE. " I was running 32lbs of tire pressure and ran over a pebble and I broke the rim."
Funny people only seem to think that way when it comes to carbon.
Glad you are enjoying the new machine.
Not to mention I like being able to swap parts between my bikes, buy a new frame and build it up with existing parts, etc. No matter how good the bike is, I simply can't dump $5k on a bike that only parts out to the same Cannondale.
It works great but yes,you can´t swap any wheel.
Other plus is tire clearance in any Cdale bike with equal dish,my old Jekyll has a ton of room compared to my new S. Enduro with a narrow tire.
Happily I had the best solution possible...multiple bikes. I used my ebike for the next few days until I could get some new wheels (figured the hub was a good reason to upgrade from alum to carbon)
Any spoke wrench?
Don’t tell people that. The most important rule of touching wheels is to not use just any spoke wrench.
You have this amazing tool- the internet. You found your way here, find the solution.
Here's a hint Wolftooth and OneUp
I've built up wheelsets that I've ridden for 10 years, until the rims wore through from braking. Built them on the bike, and they stayed strong straight and round better than anything I've bought premade. So yes I can dish a wheel on the bike, but no, I don't want to. I don't want to have to futz with much of anything anymore when it's not 100% at my choice and leisure. If I crack a rim, I want to pull a rear wheel off of one of my 3 boost 29ers, tighten the skewer, and ride away.
I've had my share of unusual parts, and too many times have been left MacGyvering a solution or totally SOL because of the rareness of the part. I'm fully out of that business now, and it is nice to not have to even think about it!
Different strokes for different folks...
I get annoyed when bikes have a stupid short seat tube but then are spec'd with 150mm droppers on the L or XL. If I'm demo'ing a size XL with the dropper post at min insertion and I'm sitting 20mm lower than I want to be, they're doing a shit job designing/spec'ing their bikes.
Personally, I like to have the seat totally slammed when I descend. I have an "XC" dropper that came with my bike. It's nice, but I wish it would go lower.
Personally, the bikes that prioritize downhill performance while maintaining light weight and a great pedaling platform pique my interest. I can see why someone would want a more XC focused bike that provides a bit more cushion (like the Scalpel) but that doesn't aligned with my personal preference.
Top of my current list is the Transition Spur, YT Izzo, and Specialized Epic Evo (but I'm patiently awaiting a more detailed review of it). All 3 of those weren't out even a month ago, and a month ago the top of my list was the Ibis Ripley.
Mike does a good job at trying to balance his reviews with examples for where shorter geometry works well, but overall he naturally has biases towards what works best on steep, wet BC riding, which isn't really what this class of bike is designed for or best at. I bet the review would be a lot different from the perspective of someone from Connecticut (where Cannondale is based) or Florida where speeds are lower and quick handling is a positive and not a negative.
To me, it's the bikes in this category (=120mm travel) that have all the geo, the components, and most of the weight of a 150mm bike that seem like they might disappoint everybody. But, everyone has different priorities and choice and diversity are certainly good.
Only situation I can see that it makes sense to take one of the more all-arounder downcountry bikes is if it's your only bike and you do want to do some XC racing, in which case this is probably a great option!
But out here in Colorado, I wouldn't want anything less than a 130-140 trail bike for what I ride. And yeah -- to all you Barney Bad-Asses who will jump on and tell me they ride just fine out here on a completely rigid XC racer -- good for you. I can ski Silverton on race skis, but I don't. It's more fun on something a little more forgiving, more suited to the purpose.
It's either keeping my bike, or Scalpel SE (which, in my opinion, in my region, would be fine for 90% of the time/trails. Sure once in a while might get overwhelmed, but it will be faster than Habit in 90% of the rest of the trails).
A 78 degree seat angle on flat terrain will tire out your arms, because your weight is so far forward.
The assumption is that on an enduro bike you’re pedaling up a fire road, then plunging down a steep trail, not riding flat or rolling terrain. On an xc bike, the assumption is that you’ll ride rolling terrain.
Slacker STAs normally come with shorter ETT.
It's way simpler to reward a company that doesn't think everyone rides out west.
I get your point though. I do ride out west and regularly take my SB100 down double black descents... Albeit not as fast as if I was on a slacker longer bike. I just put a higher priority on climbing stuff and tight precise corners too and thus far my bike hasn't broke descending way past it's paygrade. I grew up riding janky New England hiking trails, so maybe that's why my priorities lie where they lie.
@TheOriginalTwoTone: Ripley STA can't be much more than 69, tho there's forward offset at bb.
@sdurant: ever heard of headset spacers?
Presumably some of you have ridden something with an actually steep STA--the Ryve 100 for example. There's no reason a longer-reach short-travel bike can't work, if the HTA is slack enough to compensate for the forward relocation of center of mass. Spacers and/or riser bars will lighten pressure on hands. Isn't there a breathing advantage being more open at the hip/torso due to steeper STA? I can understand how a shorter seat tube and longer dropper will be necessary...there are so few 100mm bikes with actually steep seat tubes, and so little data, I think your rejections are fundamentally conservative. Disclaimer: I have little interest in any of these bikes.
Doing some quick trig, a bike with 160mm of travel and a 77 degree STA will have a STA of 65 degrees at 50% sag (assuming 0% sag on the fork). A bike with 100mm of travel and a 74 degree STA will have a STA of 64.5 at 40% sag.
Most of them are probably 75 at sag anyway, which is where it counts (these field tests should measure seat angle at sag) and the rest is paychological
Yes I know the difference between effective and actual. My saddle height was close to what they use to get the ESTA. One thing I think more brands should do is post saddle height used to get ESTA.
So why the race times?
I'm certain these are trail bikes for trekking and doing long rides comfortably.
These types of bikes will be destroyed quickly if you treat them as race bikes.
It's a 6 pound frame not an 8 pound frame.
I would love a 25 pound 5 by 5 bike . I wouldn't charge down North Shore trails with it. These are exelent long distance trail bikes I would love to have one for it's intended purpose. Trail riding not racing.
As they usually do this in the seatstay, they are essentially imo a linkage-driven single-pivot (as opposed to a 4-bar).
Where they all on the same rims? At least the same width? All hookless, or not?
All of those are as important as pressure to ensure a matching contact patch and tread & sidewall deformation. If those factors don't match, having the identical pressure doesn't really matter that much.
In the pic right below, there is a good 6cm of post above the clamp. Looks like the _length_ of the seatube isn't the limiting factor there, though of course the _max insertion_ might be a factor, except that's not how it was reported here.
Spur: eliminated - too much bike for the flats of N.Texas
SB115: eliminated - heavy and outdated
Scalpel SE: eliminated - questionable quality, proprietary crap
it's now down to EPIC EVO vs. Ranger
I'm not a Specialized fan to say the least but worried the Ranger is too much bike for me...
Ranger - Slowest on the climb. 2nd fastest dh
Epic - Fastest Climb, Fastest lap
The second fastest bike is less than half the price of the EVO, so what does that say?
- Epic
- Ranger
- Spur
- Ripley
Am I missing any?
You can't slacken one angle a different amount than the other. The seat tube and the head tube are on the same structure.
Join Pinkbike Login