Cannondale Scalpel
Wheel Size: 29’’
Travel: 120 mm rear / 120 mm front
Geometry Highlights:
- Sizes offered: SM, MD, LG, XL
- Headtube angle: 66.6° (🤘)
- Reach: 475 mm (Size Large)
- Chainstay length: 442 mm (Size Large)
Frame Material: Carbon fiber
Price: Complete bikes starting at $4,000 USD / $5,455 CAD
Blister’s Measured Weight (Scalpel 2, size L, tubeless): 25.6 lbs
Test Locations: Colorado
Reviewers:
- Simon Stewart: 6’, 170 lbs / 183 cm, 77.1 kg
- Dylan Wood: 5’10.5”, 160 lbs / 179 cm, 72.5 kg
Test Duration: 6 months
Intro
The Cannondale Scalpel has been a fixture in the brand’s lineup since 2002, when it was first launched as an early example of a full suspension Cross Country race bike. With race courses getting more technical, the Scalpel has evolved again to meet the needs of the modern XC racer — so what has Cannondale cooked up? Let’s dig into the details of the overhauled Scalpel range.
The Frame
Cannondale emphasizes that the reimagined Scalpel is a product of the Cannondale Factory Racing team’s feedback, but the updates leave a lot for mile-munching trail riders to look forward to as well. Suspension travel has been increased to 120 mm front and rear (from 100 mm front and rear) across the range, with that increased squish coming via a linkage-driven shock and a flex pivot at the chain stays. A number of the higher-end models also get Cannondale’s iconic Lefty fork, which we’ll discuss more in the Builds section, but with more availability through the European models — North Americans are limited to the Lefty only being offered on the ultra-flash LAB71 model.
Speaking of the LAB71 version of the Scalpel, it also gets the fanciest carbon layup of the range, using Cannondale’s “Series 0 Carbon” construction whereas the rest of the models get the “Series 1 Carbon.” Based on the prior Scalpel, which used a higher modulus carbon for the top-end “Hi-Mod” frames, the “Series 0 Carbon” spec on the LAB71 version likely gets a higher grade carbon material with a lower frame weight — a practice that we’ve seen from other manufacturers as well (Yeti with their TURQ grade carbon, Santa Cruz with CC grade carbon, etc.)
The Scalpel’s suspension uses a similar rocker link and flex pivot arrangement to a whole lot of modern XC race bikes (Yeti quipped that their new ASR “looks a lot like everything else / works a lot like nothing else”) and it’s interesting to see how widely that general layout is being adopted in the class, even by companies (e.g. Santa Cruz, with the Blur) who use a very different suspension design on their longer-travel offerings. Cannondale calls their interpretation of this layout “Proportional Response,” referring to the customized kinematics that vary by frame size to optimize the ride for different size riders.
Another arguably unfortunate trend across the industry is the move toward headset cable routing. The Scalpel packages all but the front brake line through the headset, with higher-end models getting Cannondale’s new SystemBar XC-One, a one-piece carbon bar and stem combo that also serves to guide the cables down into the headset in a clean package.
As a final note, readers won’t be surprised to hear that the Scalpel has joined the ranks of bikes using the UDH derailleur hanger standard, which makes it not only compatible with SRAM’s Transmission but also makes sourcing a derailleur hanger in a pinch both easy and inexpensive.
Fit & Geometry
The new Scalpel is the latest in a list of Cross Country bikes that have gotten the longer and slacker treatment. The Scalpel sees its head angle brought back to 66.6°, a number which wouldn’t have been out of place on longer travel Trail bikes just a few years ago but now seems fairly common amongst Cross Country race bikes.
While the head angle signals the new Scalpel’s more capable intentions, Cannondale has also gone the extra mile to make size-specific geometry across the range. While the headtube angle remains steady across the size range, Cannondale varies the chain stay length and actual seat tube angle to help promote consistent body positioning and front-to-rear balance across all sizes.
Note that the geometry chart above is for the non-Lefty-equipped Scalpel; the Lefty fork runs a 50 mm offset whereas the non-Lefty models come with a 44 mm offset. This doesn’t materially affect geometry in most ways aside from lengthening the wheelbase very slightly, but would likely result in some slightly different steering characteristics on the trail.
The Builds
Cannondale has done well to provide a wide range of build options to suit a range of budgets, from the $4,000 USD Scalpel 4 to the eye-popping $14,000 Scalpel LAB71. North America and Europe get slightly different builds, with the common model being the range-topping LAB71 build, and the various options getting a mix of SRAM and Shimano parts depending on the model. Interestingly, the LAB71 model is the only Lefty-equipped model in the North American market, whereas Europe sees more of the range equipped with the Lefty Ocho 120 Carbon, along with a Lefty Ocho 120 Alloy on some of the more wallet-friendly builds.
The full suite of North American builds is as follows, and it’s great to see Cannondale including dropper posts on every model across the range. Additionally, all models get 2.4” wide Maxxis tires which are a bit wider than the norm in the Cross Country realm.
- Drivetrain: Shimano Deore M6100, w/ Shimano M8100 derailleur
- Brakes: Shimano MT501 (180 mm front rotor, 160 mm rear rotor)
- Fork: RockShox SID (120 mm)
- Shock: RockShox SIDLuxe Select+, 2 position adjustment
- Wheels: Stan’s NoTubes Crest S2 rims, Shimano TC500/MT410B hubs
- Dropper Post: Cannondale DownLow (SM: 125 mm; MD-XL: 150 mm)
- Drivetrain: Shimano XT M8100, w/ Deore M6120 crank
- Brakes: Shimano Deore M6100 (180 mm front rotor, 160 mm rear rotor)
- Fork: RockShox SID Select (120 mm)
- Shock: RockShox SIDLuxe Select+, 2 position adjustment
- Wheels: Stan’s NoTubes Crest MK4 rims, Shimano TC-500 hubs
- Dropper Post: Cannondale DownLow (SM: 125 mm; MD-XL: 150 mm)
- Drivetrain: SRAM GX Eagle AXS Transmission
- Brakes: SRAM Level Bronze Stealth (180 mm front rotor, 160 mm rear rotor)
- Fork: RockShox SID Select+ RL (120 mm)
- Shock: RockShox SIDLuxe Select+, 2 position adjustment
- Wheels: Cannondale HollowGram XC-S 2, carbon
- Dropper Post: Fox Transfer SL Performance Elite (SM: 125 mm; MD-XL: 150 mm)
- Drivetrain: SRAM XO Eagle AXS Transmission
- Brakes: SRAM Level Silver Stealth (180 mm front rotor, 160 mm rear rotor)
- Fork: Fox Float Factory 34 StepCast (120 mm)
- Shock: Fox Float SL Factory EVOL SV
- Wheels: DT Swiss XCR 1501 Spline One, carbon
- Dropper Post: Fox Transfer SL Factory (SM: 125 mm; MD-XL: 150 mm)
- Drivetrain: SRAM XX SL Eagle Transmission
- Brakes: SRAM Level Ultimate Stealth (180 mm front rotor, 160 mm rear rotor)
- Fork: Cannondale Lefty Ocho 120 Carbon (120 mm)
- Shock: RockShox SIDLuxe Ultimate, 2 position adjustment, TwistLoc Ultimate remote dual lockout
- Wheels: DT Swiss XCR 1200 Spline, carbon
- Dropper Post: RockShox Reverb AXS (SM: 125 mm; MD-XL: 150 mm)
FULL REVIEW
Cannondale describes the Scalpel as a bike capable of winning World Cup XC races (which it has), but it also has 120 mm of travel, which not that long ago were Trail bike numbers. We’ve put a ton of miles on the Scalpel, many of those in terrain not particularly well suited to Cross-Country race bikes. But the bar has been raised, and XC race courses are more technical than they’ve ever been, so we got to know the Scalpel inside and outside of the tape. Is 120 mm the new sweet spot for XC race bikes, and has the proliferation of flex stay rear suspensions changed the game? Read on to find out if the Scalpel is still the razor-sharp race-focused instrument it’s been in the past, or if it’s a more versatile and Trail-friendly take on an iconic XC race bike.
And since the Scalpel is such a good comparison for the Yeti ASR that we tested concurrently, we’ve put together a head-to-head video showcasing the two:
Fit & Sizing
Simon Stewart (6’, 170 lb / 183 cm, 77.1 kg): The Scalpel is an XC race bike and it fits like you would expect an XC race bike to — it has a low stack height with a long (by 2024 standards anyway) 75 mm stem, and a not steep seat tube angle resulting in a fairly stretched out seated pedaling position. Our size Large Scalpel has a 475 mm reach, and a 75.5º effective seat tube angle, I’d say the reach feels a bit longer than 475 mm due to the stretched-out position, but feels appropriate for a size Large bike with a decidedly XC focus.
At 6’ (183 cm), I’m right at the top of Cannondale’s recommended range for the size Large, and at the bottom of the range for an XL. There is a fairly big 35 mm jump in reach going up to the size XL (510 mm reach), and given I’m already stretched out on the size Large, I’m confident the size XL would feel too big, and the size Large is the right one for me.
It’s been a minute since I’ve been on a bike with such a sporty XC fit, and given my affinity for high stack heights, it took a bit to adjust to. It should be noted though, that the bike showed up with the steerer pre-cut to Dylan Wood’s low bar height preference, so I have to thank him for that. With that said, I got used to it fairly quickly. Would I have preferred a higher bar height? Probably, but like I said, it wasn’t much of an issue, and if it were my bike I just wouldn’t have cut the steerer so short.
Overall, I’m comfortable enough on the Scalpel for short to medium-length rides, but when pushing into the four or five-hour realm, I get a little fidgety and my neck and back start to complain — all things likely made better by a higher handlebar height.
Dylan Wood (5’10.5”, 160 lbs / 179 cm, 72.5 kg): Yep, the Scalpel has a very race-oriented fit, though I still found it to be comfortable enough to spend several hours in the saddle. It certainly encourages a forward, aggressive pedaling position, providing some aerodynamic advantages as well. For this bike’s intended use, I think the fit is very reasonable, and I wouldn’t want to size down to the Medium. At my height, I’m right in the middle of Cannondale’s recommended sizing for the size Large, and I think the recommendation is spot on.
With the stem spec’d on our Scalpel 2, you can’t run it anywhere but at the top of the fork’s steer tube due to the integrated top cap. This limits your fit customization options for different types of rides or race courses but results in a pretty clean look.
Climbing
Simon: It’s not going to come as a surprise that the Scalpel is incredibly efficient and fast uphill. Cannondale’s FlexPivot suspension is active and has pretty good traction, but it’s not hard to overwhelm the Maxxis Aspen rear tire in loose conditions if you get a little excited about putting the power down. I preferred leaving the rear shock compression adjuster in the open position for that reason — I found it had better traction with little to no perceived reduction in efficiency.
In steep climbing situations, the Scalpel makes it easy to stay on line due to the forward weight bias dictated by the low stack height and long stem. The 75.5º seat tube angle is not that steep, but since it sags less than longer-travel bikes, the result is a seat tube angle that stays more consistent, and coupled with the generally higher climbing speeds the Scalpel is capable of, I didn’t find myself wishing it was steeper. On really steep sections I do have to shift my weight a good bit forward on the saddle, but again, not so much that I would prefer a steeper seat tube angle.
At first, I thought technical climbing was not the Scalpel’s strong suit, but after more time on it I started to change that opinion — it actually does quite well, but requires a bit of a different approach than bikes with more travel and less XC-oriented geometry. Maintaining traction and getting up rocky ledge moves requires finesse — in fact, all aspects of climbing tricky terrain take some skill because the Scalpel isn’t very forgiving — but it is easier to tap into that skill and ride with finesse because it’s so light and efficient that you’re typically using less energy than you would on a lot of other bikes.
On undulating trails with short punchy climbs, the Scalpel is fantastic. It carries tons of momentum everywhere (thanks in no small part to the exceptionally fast rolling tires), accelerates out of corners beautifully, and seems to reward every pedal stroke with more speed. I really enjoy sprinting up climbs at full gas, recovering a bit on the flats thanks to how well the Scalpel rolls, and then getting back on it for the next one.
I only used the suspension lockouts on fire-road or pavement climbs, which gave a slight benefit when pedaling out of the saddle during hard efforts, but in my opinion, the Scalpel’s suspension doesn’t need any help in the efficiency department.
Dylan: Even though modern XC race bikes are becoming more and more downhill-capable, they still have to be good climbers first and foremost, and the Scalpel is one of the most efficient mountain bikes I’ve ever ridden.
As Simon mentioned, the Scalpel has a distinct bias toward efficiency, but when keeping the rear shock fully open, it still has respectable traction, too. It’s efficient enough that I didn’t find a need to touch that rear lockout much, especially because the low-profile Maxxis Aspen rear tire is quite easy to break loose.
The Scalpel allows for an easy time pedaling away in the saddle, finding a nice rhythm, and taking full advantage of the bike’s efficiency. Just about every ounce of power you put into the cranks results in forward momentum, which also encourages aggressive, out-of-the-saddle efforts when warranted.
That said, I did find myself wishing for some sort of remote lockout on the Scalpel. You have to get the top-of-the-line Scalpel Lab74 for a remote lockout to be stocked on the bike, and the Scalpel 2 frame does have cable routing for a rear shock lockout, but I found myself using the fork and shock lockouts less because they were harder to reach on the fly — likely losing some efficiency in the process.
Descending
Simon: The Scalpel’s FlexPivot suspension impressed me right away with how active and sensitive it is, while also being well controlled. In many ways, it reminds me of the Moterra SL’s suspension in that it doesn’t obviously come across as a flex-stay stay design, and feels more like it has conventional suspension pivots. Some flex-stay bikes I’ve ridden have felt under-damped when rebounding, but that is not the case on the Scalpel.
The RockShox SID Select+ rear shock manages the energy of the FlexPivot well, and due to the low volume air can, it ramps up quickly towards the end of the travel so there’s plenty of bottom-out resistance — in fact, I don’t think I ever bottomed it out.
When hurtling down rocky descents, the Scalpel’s suspension and geometry make speeds that seem like a bad idea on an XC bike possible, and the more time I got aboard the Scalpel, the more confidence I gained in its ability to push its limits. As composed as the Scalpel is given its XC focus, it still descends in a very business-like way — it gets the job done surprisingly well, but it doesn’t encourage you to look for creative lines either, instead favoring a more conservative and precise riding style.
The more stretched-out cockpit and low bar height put a weight bias on the front wheel, which helps the Maxxis Rekon race front tire maintain traction, but it also lightens the back end up a good bit, and in combination with the tread-challenged Maxxis Aspen rear tire, that makes the Scalpel’s back end a bit loose. The rear wheel of the Scalpel is easily knocked off line, and it likes to step out in corners — which, to be clear, is pretty fun, but also led to some sketchy moments.
Interestingly, given the Scalpel’s more forward weight bias, I still find it a bit easier to manual than the Yeti ASR, which has a more upright Trail bike-esque fit. I think a lot of that has to do with the Scalpel’s slightly more controlled rebound damping right at the point when transitioning the flex stay from compression to rebound — the Scalpel doesn’t fight the front wheel coming up like the ASR tends to.
Not surprisingly, the Scalpel could go a lot faster on chunky descents with a little more tire underneath it. Often the only reason I found myself dialing the speed back was because I didn’t want to destroy a tire. Of course, upgrading to burlier tires will solve that, but at the expense of weight and rolling resistance, which are two things I don’t want to change about the Scalpel.
Dylan: I agree. The Scalpel’s 120 mm of rear suspension is very well managed by its flex stay platform. It feels more energetic and lively than damp and plush, and it never tricked me into thinking I had more travel available than it really did, but the Scalpel did an excellent job of having all 120 mm of travel available without the bottom of the travel being too easy to find.
The Scalpel pairs this efficient suspension platform with modern, capable geometry, creating an impressively capable descender. With a respectable 475 mm reach (size Large), the Scalpel has a big sweet spot and a lot of inherent stability between the wheels, allowing you to go quite fast on it through chunky terrain.
It’s worth emphasizing that there isn’t much inherent traction with the Scalpel, and you have to be strategic about where you do and do not brake. But I found myself most comfortable going fast on the Scalpel when taking a more dynamic riding style through technical sections of trail, mostly keeping off the brakes until it was necessary. Most of the time, the Scalpel lets you get away with a more passive riding style downhill, recovering and saving energy for the next hard uphill effort.
The Build
Simon: Cannondale deserves credit for a very well-thought-out spec with impressive value. Standouts are the SRAM GX Transmission, RockShox SID Select+ RL fork and SIDLuxe Select+ shock, and the Cannondale HollowGram XC-S 27 carbon wheelset.
The RockShox SID fork and shock combination is one the reasons the Scalpel is such a capable descender, delivering a nicely balanced front and rear suspension feel. I subjected the Scalpel to some long, steep, and fast rocky descents, the kind of descents that are common in races like the Breck Epic (a race crowded with bikes like the Scalpel), and the damping stayed consistent on both, even when the little SID rear shock got pretty hot.
The 150 mm travel Fox Transfer SL Performance Elite seat post is appropriate and has adequate travel, but it takes some getting used to. It’s a two-position post, either up or down, and it needs to be fully extended to lock in place, I repeatedly put my weight back on the seat before the post had fully returned and locked in, which is instantly met with it going straight back down. Honestly, I never really got fully used to it, and even after months of riding was still miss-timing putting weight back on the seat. Apparently, years of having infinitely adjustable travel seat posts have left a mark on me, but it’s likely just me because Dylan had no problems. Old dogs, new tricks, etc.
I wasn’t super impressed by the SRAM Level Bronze Stealth brakes. They do have four-piston calipers, but I found them to have questionable modulation with the power feeling very on or off, and they didn’t feel any more powerful than many dual-piston brakes.
Tire choice is about as XC as it gets with a Maxxis Aspen in the rear and Maxxis Rekon Race up front. The Aspen struggled a bit in the loose-over-hard conditions I mostly rode the Scalpel in, but I also can’t remember ever being on a mountain bike tire that rolls as fast as it does. As I mentioned above, the brake spec left a lot to be desired in the modulation department, and combined with the Aspen rear tire, I found it difficult to brake without skidding.
Lastly, the Scalpel is a good-looking bike. I love the very subtle checkered flag graphics on the frame – often only noticeable in direct sunlight.
Dylan: I agree, the Scalpel 2 has a well-sorted-out build kit with lots of value packed in. I’m a big fan of GX Transmission, and I agree that the RockShox SID suspension deserves some credit for this bike’s impressive downhill capabilities. I definitely wouldn’t want any more powerful brakes, as I think that would result in loss of traction being more common, but I do agree that I would appreciate some more modulation at high speeds. (I found low-speed modulation to be just fine.)
I personally got along great with the Fox Transfer SL dropper post, as I never found much of a need for the post to be anywhere but all the way up or all the way down, and it doesn’t take much force at all to lower the post all the way, which can be a waste of energy on a sticky dropper.
It’s worth mentioning that the Scalpel 2 comes stock with Cannondale’s HollowGram XC-S 27 carbon wheelset, which is quite impressive at this price point. I found these wheels to offer some nice compliance while still being pretty precise.
Who’s It For?
Simon: This really is the big question here: is the Scapel just for XC racing? My answer is definitely not. It is a much more capable and versatile bike than its primary intended use might suggest. Folks looking to compliment a longer-travel Trail or Enduro bike with something that doesn’t end up being just like the other bikes in the quiver should take a look at the Scalpel — it encourages you to ride faster everywhere, it can handle just about anything you throw at it, and you may just find yourself drawn to putting it between the tape.
Dylan: Simon nailed it. The Scalpel isn’t just a good XC race bike, it’s an excellent choice for people who appreciate a quick, efficient climber but still want to have fun and go fast on the way down — whether or not they’re racing.
Bottom Line
The Cannondale Scalpel has evolved into a very capable bike that does a lot more than just climb well. It is an inspiring climber, and the 120 mm of front and rear travel ensures that the race won’t be lost on the descent. Even if it never sees a number plate, the Scalpel’s ability to cover a lot of ground quickly and confidentially makes it a great addition to a stable of longer-travel bikes — and it likely will end up getting ridden a lot more than expected, because it turns out it’s really fun to ride fast.
Deep Dive Comparisons
BLISTER+ members and those who purchase our Digital Access Pass can check out our Deep Dive comparisons linked below. Get our Digital Access Pass to view all our Deep Dives and Flash Reviews, or become a BLISTER+ member today to get access to that and a LOT more, including the best worldwide Outdoor Injury Insurance, exclusive deals and discounts on skis, personalized gear recommendations from us, and much more.
Deep Dive: Cannondale Scalpel
We compare the Cannondale Scalpel to the Yeti ASR, Commencal T.E.M.P.O, Revel Ranger, Yeti SB120, Niner JET 9 RDO, Pivot Trail 429, SCOR 2030, Specialized Epic Evo, and Trek Top Fuel.
Blister’s Flash Reviews and Deep Dives are accessible to those who purchase one of our paid subscriptions
To get our comprehensive Deep Dives and our initial, unfiltered reports on new gear, become a member and receive many other services, deals, and discounts.
If you’re already an active member, please log in.
(If you’re already logged in and a member in good standing and seeing this message in error, please refresh this page in your browser.)
Looks fast and fun. A bit disturbed by the broken frame reported during the press junket.
Hello, I am interested in the scalpel, I have a workshop and I sell parts!! I would like to know if you could give me a price on the scalpel 2 2024 with lefty? I am leave in pr!!
@Tom – looks like it was Robert Johnston at the loamwolf, who adds some details about that in their review. Sounds like they were asking a lot more out of the bike than it’s designed for. I’m not hitting any features, much less anything like what they crunched the frame on, so I remain sanguine :)
Great review – how big a difference is it compared to a Trek Top Fuel (Gen 3 or 4)? They both have 120 mm and dont seem to be that different geo wise but how different is the ride?
We cover that in our Deep Dive on the Scalpel!