Tested: Cannondale Scalpel 2

BIKE Magazine aims to feature only the best products and services. If you buy something via one of our links, we may earn a commission.

Now that we’re in the thick of the UCI World Cup season, it’s been fun to review the same new Cannondale Scalpel frame that frequent podium contender Alan Hatherly, World Champ Charlie Aldridge, and marathon crusher Mona Mitterwallner are riding on any given weekend. And what I’ve found is that the Scalpel is not only a wicked climber but also a surprisingly fun and intuitive descender.

Cannondale Scalpel 2 in a Nutshell

• Travel: 120 mm (rear) 120 mm (front)
• Wheel Size: 29”
• Frame Material: Carbon
• Frame Sizes: S-XL
• Head Tube Angle: 66.6°
• Seat Tube Angle (Effective): 75.5°
• Size Tested: Medium
• MSRP: $6,500
• Bike Weight: 25 lb 5 oz (11.5 kg)
• Partial Build Weight (complete bike without wheels, tires, rotors, or cassette): 16 lb 5 oz (7.4 kg)

The Cannondale Scalpel 2 is available now .

Cannondale Scalpel 2 Review

Just in time for the 2024 Olympics, Cannondale announced the latest generation of the Scalpel back in March. Similar to other new XC bike releases this year, the race bike got more travel front and rear (120 mm up from 100 mm), a slacker head tube, steeper seat tube, longer reach, and 29” wheels across the board, instead of 27.5” wheels on the size small.

Sizing and Geometry

I rode a size medium, which gets a generous 150 mm dropper and has a 450 mm reach (a number that seems nearly ubiquitous in this bike size and category) and 438 mm chainstays (which vary depending on size).

Unlike many modern trail bikes, the Scalpel doesn’t have any flip chips or reach adjustments but since this bike is made for the specific purpose of going fast, it doesn’t make sense to add weight in order to enable geometry tinkering. The head tube angle is 66.6° and the effective seat tube is 75.5°, which positions the Scalpel squarely in the middle of what brands are offering these days.

Like other modern XC bikes, the Scalpel’s updated geometry speaks to the more technical race tracks on the circuit and the fact that brands are now able to design more capable bikes without paying too much of a weight penalty.

Build and Price

The Scalpel 2 costs $6,500 and comes with SRAM GX Transmission, a carbon bar and stem, RockShox Sid Select+ suspension, carbon Cannondale rims, SRAM Level Bronze Stealth brakes, and a Fox Transfer SL post. As a consumer I wouldn’t ever be shopping for a bike with a higher spec level than this, so I was glad to be testing the Scalpel 2.

In the US only the top-dollar Scalpel comes equipped with the Lefty Ocho 120 fork and the SystemBar XC-One integrated bar-stem, but those are available aftermarket if you feel your experience is lacking without them. (I would have loved to try the Lefty – people say it rides really well once you get over the weirdness of staring down at a single fork leg.)

SRAM’s Level Bronze Stealth brakes with 180/160 mm rotors perform just fine for me, although bigger riders might find them undergunned. I appreciate the four-piston brakes as another nod to making the Scalpel more of an all-around bike.

The touchpoints are kind of weird. The Prologo Dimension NDR saddle looks like it could be a hatchet but ended up suiting me well, and the silicone push-on grips have a nice hand feel and probably weigh next to nothing, but their hexagonal shape made my hands ache on long descents.

Fox claims that the Transfer SL dropper post is the lightest mainstream dropper on the market. The post shaves weight by only having two positions, and going between it and normal droppers takes some adjustment. It turns out I actually ride in the middle of the post way more often than I would’ve thought, when I’m sitting at stop signs, coasting down roads, and even on technical uphill moves. The return on the post is very snappy, so anytime I went searching for a middle setting it would instead whip back up to full height with plenty of mustard on the motion. (Maybe I shouldn’t be complaining though – the last generation of the Scalpel didn’t even come with a dropper.)

The Cannondale HollowGram XC-S 27 carbon wheels are light, stiff, and entirely inoffensive – not the plushest-riding carbon wheels I’ve ever used but definitely not harsh, with middle-of-the-road engagement thanks to DT Swiss internals. The Rekon Race up front and Aspen in the back seem to mesh well with this bike’s intentions – I like the little bit of extra traction on roots that the Rekon Race affords, while the minimal rolling resistance of the Aspen is great.

Unfortunately the Scalpel 2, despite being a more budget friendly model, still has through-headset cable routing. That, paired with a gargoyle-like Cannondale Conceal stem, means the front end isn’t any mechanic’s dream.

The Scalpel 2 ($6,500) is better priced than the Santa Cruz GX AXS Blur without carbon wheels ($6,599) or the Specialized Epic 8 Expert ($7,000), and absolutely crushes the Rocky Mountain Element C70 ($7,899).

I’ve mused on this before but spec sheets are looking nearly indistinguishable these days (partly due to SRAM’s chokehold on the OEM market); almost all of the above-mentioned bikes have Sid Select+ suspension, Level Bronze Stealth brakes, GX Transmission, and some combination of Maxxis Rekon or Aspen tires. It’s downright uncanny, but it does make price comparisons easy, and the Scalpel looks good lined up against most of its competitors. However, none of those other models have headset routing, and the Epic does have downtube frame storage, which could tip the scale for you.

And then you have DTC outliers like Canyon, which is offering the same kit on its Lux Trail CF 9 for $5,299 (currently marked down to $4,649) but it’s hard to stack up against the prices that Canyon and its ilk can offer.

So now more than ever it’s important to test ride a bike and get a taste for how it feels – or is it time to throw up your hands and say that all XC bikes are the same?

Where does the Cannondale Scalpel shine?

The Scalpel is a rocket ship. No surprises there. As I test more XC bikes I’m running out of ways to say “Holy hell this bike climbs fast,” but if ever there was a time to say it, it’s now: holy hell. This bike does indeed climb fast. It’s a pleasure to accelerate out of the saddle, handles seated climbing just as well, maintains good traction over tech, and rewards momentum.

But what I really noticed is how pleasant descending on the Scalpel is. I expect a certain amount of chatter through repeated hits on an XC bike, but I found the Scalpel to be quiet, in terms of noise but more importantly in terms of how it absorbed little bumps instead of deflecting off them.

It’s really fun and easy to jump. Its weight paired with a taut suspension platform and stiff wheels means launching the Scalpel is effortless, and that quietness I mentioned translates to gentler landings than you’d expect with such a dainty bike.

Where does the Cannondale Scalpel make some compromises?

I didn’t find much in the way of shortcomings with this bike. It’s not cheap but it’s better priced than many comparable models. It doesn’t have in-frame storage but most bikes in this category don’t. It does have an ugly stem-headset assemblage with cables running through it, which the internet and bike mechanics alike have decided is the wrong call.

On the trail, the Scalpel has the limitations that I would expect with a race-oriented 120 mm carbon bike. It has a speed limit on rough descents and requires more precision to pilot than a bike with more travel and more substantial tires.

Comparisons

The Scalpel isn’t wildly different from the two other XC bikes I’ve been riding over the past five months. It sits somewhere in between the Liv Pique and the Epic Evo , with the Epic Evo having the most travel and slackest head tube and the Pique sharing the same travel numbers but falling closer to the conservative end of the geometry range.

I thought the Pique and the Scalpel shared the spritely personality of really light, performance-oriented bikes that reward hard efforts and are fun to launch off every root and lip, mostly thanks to their low weight and stiffness. The Scalpel did feel more stable and quieter on landings than the Pique, and on climbs and high-speed straightaways I preferred the 30 mm longer reach of the Scalpel.

The Epic Evo might not be a fair comparison because its more aggressive spec puts it squarely in the downcountry category, but that doesn’t mean it’s a slouch, and I would still happily race any XC event on the Evo, although the Scalpel has an edge when it comes to efficiency. I did find the Evo to be more of a point-and-shoot bike on descents, no matter how I had the suspension set up – it didn’t require the finesse of a smaller bike but also didn’t transmit every bit of energy into airtime or forward momentum quite the same way the Scalpel did.

All in All

After spending a couple of months on the Scalpel 2, I’m a big fan of the geometry and travel changes that make it fit right in with the rest of the bikes in the genre. I think the Scalpel is a confidence-inspiring, stable but snappy XC bike. If you spend most of your time on the pointy end of races or enjoy riding big backcountry loops really quickly, you could do much worse.