Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ... 6789 LastLast
Results 176 to 200 of 205

Thread: 2018 Tarmac

  1. #176
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    428
    That's exactly what I was thinking.

    Partnering up with anyone may be a good deal. You never know until you do it. McLaren is not a cheap company and they have a proven track record of making winning carbon products. If I was the CEO, I certainly would not give away all those R&D dollars in the past. We'll never know if it was good money spent or not.

  2. #177
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: 11spd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    708
    Quote Originally Posted by 1Butcher View Post
    That's exactly what I was thinking.

    Partnering up with anyone may be a good deal. You never know until you do it. McLaren is not a cheap company and they have a proven track record of making winning carbon products. If I was the CEO, I certainly would not give away all those R&D dollars in the past. We'll never know if it was good money spent or not.
    Yes...perhaps limited value added if you believe the single review here that a SL4 is a better feeling bike than SL5...but Specialized gets some marketing out of the slogan 'rider first engineering' and of course using the racing name McClaren.

    You want completely cynical? McClaren did almost nothing but lend their name for some advertising dollars. So far at least one rider here doesn't think the SL5 is an improvement over the SL4. What is somewhat surprising is this rider believes its a step back.
    Last edited by 11spd; 09-18-2017 at 07:56 AM.

  3. #178
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: 11spd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    708
    Quote Originally Posted by Arnoud View Post
    For bigger and smaller sizes it may very well work. For the "average" sizes 54 and 56 the differences were said to be smaller, is as I understand and it work.


    Verzonden vanaf mijn iPad met Tapatalk
    True, but one wouldn't think the SL5 to be a step backward in any size.

  4. #179
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    139
    But on the other hand the SL6, which is rider first as well, a lot better...


    Verzonden vanaf mijn iPad met Tapatalk

  5. #180
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: taodemon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    477
    I've only been on a 9r SL4 vs the 11R on my SL5 and the SL5 feels more responsive to me but that isn't exactly a direct comparison due to different carbon and slightly different spec on the bike. Size 54 SL4, vs 56 SL5 too. My anecdotal 2c.
    Last edited by taodemon; 09-18-2017 at 10:50 AM.

  6. #181
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: 11spd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    708
    Quote Originally Posted by Arnoud View Post
    But on the other hand the SL6, which is rider first as well, a lot better...


    Verzonden vanaf mijn iPad met Tapatalk
    How do you know?

  7. #182
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    139
    This was my first impression on the SL6. Very responsive bike. What I like in a bike is what I got, from the first meter I was on it. So "I liked it a lot better.."


    Verzonden vanaf mijn iPad met Tapatalk

  8. #183
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    732
    Quote Originally Posted by 11spd View Post
    Any thoughts on why you may like your SL5 less than your SL4?
    Isn't the SL5 supposed to better match ride and handling to frame size?
    I thought the SL5 was a step up from the SL4?
    The Sl5 Tarmac it's been my welcome to the Sworks world bike and it's been a complete disappointment. To make it short : it's been a shi.t of a bike.
    People say they loved the much more stiff and maybe rough SL4...

  9. #184
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: Wetworks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    912
    Quote Originally Posted by Devastazione View Post
    The Sl5 Tarmac it's been my welcome to the Sworks world bike and it's been a complete disappointment. To make it short : it's been a shi.t of a bike.
    People say they loved the much more stiff and maybe rough SL4...
    Same as you, this was my welcome to the SW world, but I couldn't be happier with mine.

  10. #185
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: taodemon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    477
    Quote Originally Posted by Devastazione View Post
    The Sl5 Tarmac it's been my welcome to the Sworks world bike and it's been a complete disappointment. To make it short : it's been a shi.t of a bike.
    People say they loved the much more stiff and maybe rough SL4...
    What are your issues with the SL5? Mine has been great, my first S Works frame as well. My old bike was a venge, though I have spent a good amount of time on my dad's sl4 non sworks tarmac. I've put 3290 miles on it since april. I'm only considering getting the new one because it supposedly combines everything I love about the SL5 and what I loved about my old venge with a bonus of shedding weight.

  11. #186
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    732
    Quote Originally Posted by Wetworks View Post
    Same as you, this was my welcome to the SW world, but I couldn't be happier with mine.
    This is what I've wrote about the bike 2 years ago. I've moved over to a Giant TCR now and it's a night and day difference. Of course the comparison should be between the new TCR and the SL6 to be more "honest" since they're both latest generation frames.
    I do like the SL6 a lot and planning to go back to Specialized in the future,but it will take some serious browsing and reading reviews online. Wich is quite difficult because even the most unbiased tester gives Specialized tons of thumbs up even when the bike is still in the box. Power of marketing that is. Lame.

    9 months into ownership : 2015 Tarmac Sworks fails to impress me.
    Last edited by Devastazione; 09-19-2017 at 08:30 AM.

  12. #187
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    139
    This was my first impression on the SL6. Very responsive bike. What I like in a bike is what I got, from the first meter I was on it. So "I liked it a lot better.."


    Verzonden vanaf mijn iPad met Tapatalk

  13. #188
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: Cni2i's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,792
    Quote Originally Posted by Devastazione View Post
    The Sl5 Tarmac it's been my welcome to the Sworks world bike and it's been a complete disappointment. To make it short : it's been a shi.t of a bike.
    People say they loved the much more stiff and maybe rough SL4...
    Just curious as to why you say that the SWSL5 had been a "shi.t of a bike" ?

    I have owned and put in many miles on the SWSL3,4 and 5 tarmac. Tried the zero.7 and cdale hi-mod and Canyon CF SLX also, but went back to the Tarmac. Perfect geometry for me and very well balanced IMO. The Canyon was pretty damn nice however.

    I am sure there are other bikes in the Tarmac's class that are great as well (you mentioned Giant TCR) but it's hard for me to believe that the SWSL5 was "shi.t". Hence curious as to why you thought so.

    Thanks.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    EyeGuy

  14. #189
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    732
    Quote Originally Posted by Cni2i View Post
    Just curious as to why you say that the SWSL5 had been a "shi.t of a bike" ?

    I have owned and put in many miles on the SWSL3,4 and 5 tarmac. Tried the zero.7 and cdale hi-mod and Canyon CF SLX also, but went back to the Tarmac. Perfect geometry for me and very well balanced IMO. The Canyon was pretty damn nice however.

    I am sure there are other bikes in the Tarmac's class that are great as well (you mentioned Giant TCR) but it's hard for me to believe that the SWSL5 was "shi.t". Hence curious as to why you thought so.

    Thanks.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    I do agree with the geometry : my body loves ALL Specialized bikes,they seems to be cut for my body,that is just amazing. I feel even much more comfortable on the TCR but' I've had to buy another stem to get there and experiment a lot with spacers, Specialized bikes you just need to set the saddle and they feel like a couch.

    I've posted a link in my former post where 2 years ago I've tried to explain what I've felt wrong with the SL5.
    To make it short : flexy at the back,very light at the front. Very nice at going at speed both downhill or on a flat road but absolutely miserable in climbing and technical road. All in all the average Specialized bike : a very comfortable,easy and sure footed bike that showed it's shortcomings if pushed hard. Was is worth it a 7200 Euro price tag over my former 3000 Euro '12 Roubaix ? No,not by a long shot.

  15. #190
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: taodemon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    477
    From reading that thread it seemed like fit issues more than anything. It didn't sound like your weight was distributed correctly and you never did the weight test with the scale. I'm not some super sprinter or climber but I can get the watts pretty high and I've never noticed flex in the frame on climbs or hard sprints.

    I'm 6ft, 180ish at the start of the season, down to 165 now. Same 56 size frame and probably running more flexy wheels than the rovals. The bike is noticeably stiffer than the 10r venge I had before (all same components) and while not as drastic as the venge still more nimble and responsive than my dad's 54" 9r sl4 I rode with my wheels until the sworks frame arrived after a cracked my venge frame.

    That or you just couldn't get used to the steering/handling characteristics of the tarmac. I would imagine it would be a lot more responsive (probably what you call light) than the roubaix. It is more than the venge too but for me this is a characteristic I ended up liking a lot. The bike feels more alive compared to the venge, and makes the riding a lot of fun. I've never felt unsafe as a result and if anything on hard sprint efforts up short hills I've had the back of the bike lighten up more than the front, which is more an issue of weight distribution than anything else (leaning too far forward on a steep hill in my case). I've never had the front want to "lift" up on any type of terrain or effort.
    Last edited by taodemon; 09-19-2017 at 12:20 PM.

  16. #191
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: Wetworks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    912
    Quote Originally Posted by Devastazione View Post
    This is what I've wrote about the bike 2 years ago. I've moved over to a Giant TCR now and it's a night and day difference. Of course the comparison should be between the new TCR and the SL6 to be more "honest" since they're both latest generation frames.
    I do like the SL6 a lot and planning to go back to Specialized in the future,but it will take some serious browsing and reading reviews online. Wich is quite difficult because even the most unbiased tester gives Specialized tons of thumbs up even when the bike is still in the box. Power of marketing that is. Lame.

    9 months into ownership : 2015 Tarmac Sworks fails to impress me.
    Thanks for the link. I read through what you wrote. So far, the only thing I agree with is just how surprisingly comfortable the bike is for a "race" bike. I think I kind of understand your description about the light feeling of the front end, but I attribute that to responsiveness. I think my initial word for it was "twitchiness."

    As for flex, never seen anything like that. The BB is enormous and the chainstay is pretty beefy. I stood up for a KOM sprint yesterday, laid down some serious watts over 400m at 205 pounds; got the KOM and didn't feel any difference in responsiveness compared to my Venge Vias. JMO, yours is yours.

    This all said, I really am intrigued to try out the new SL6.

  17. #192
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: taodemon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    477
    Quote Originally Posted by Wetworks View Post
    This all said, I really am intrigued to try out the new SL6.
    The idea of if being as stiff and responsive as the current sl5 plus the aero the old venge while shedding weight has me really interested. I only wish I had local bike stores that would stock them for test rides.

  18. #193
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: Cni2i's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,792
    Does anyone know approximately what is the what difference between the standard SWSL6 Tarmac vs its ULTRAlight version? I see the 733 gm (56 cm) quoted in many places. I assumed that was for the standard SL6. Just curious. Thank you.
    EyeGuy

  19. #194
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    255
    Quote Originally Posted by Cni2i View Post
    Does anyone know approximately what is the what difference between the standard SWSL6 Tarmac vs its ULTRAlight version? I see the 733 gm (56 cm) quoted in many places. I assumed that was for the standard SL6. Just curious. Thank you.
    733g is the advertised weight of a 56cm Ultralight. The few that I've seen have actually come in closer to 780-800g. The non-Ultralights are coming in around 880-900g.

  20. #195
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: Cni2i's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,792
    Quote Originally Posted by ceugene View Post
    733g is the advertised weight of a 56cm Ultralight. The few that I've seen have actually come in closer to 780-800g. The non-Ultralights are coming in around 880-900g.
    Thank you for that. Odd b/c I thought a couple of reviews said the SL6 in 56 cm was 733g and went on to say that the UL version shaves off a bit more weight from that due to the paint scheme...or lack there of. But I figured they usually quite lower weights than actual.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    EyeGuy

  21. #196
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    1
    Hi guys,

    Greetings from Italy ...
    I have one technical question, hope you can help me...

    I see the new tarmac ultralight mounts the EW-RS 910 Di2 junction in the handlebar.

    I just had a look on the spe website and it seems the s-works carbon shallow handlebar hasn't any hole for the Di2 cabling ...

    How is it possible then to install this junction like in the ultralight?

    Does the new tarmac have a dedicated version of the bend?

    Thanks in advance for your support!!

  22. #197
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: Cni2i's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,792


    Just need direct mounted brakes. DA of course are great performing brakes and relatively not too $ compared with ee brakes. But getting a very light frame and using heavier brakes than what I currently use (Std ee brakes) somewhat negates the weight savings of the UL frame, no?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    EyeGuy

  23. #198
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    732
    Quote Originally Posted by Maverick78y View Post
    Hi guys,

    Greetings from Italy ...
    I have one technical question, hope you can help me...

    I see the new tarmac ultralight mounts the EW-RS 910 Di2 junction in the handlebar.

    I just had a look on the spe website and it seems the s-works carbon shallow handlebar hasn't any hole for the Di2 cabling ...

    How is it possible then to install this junction like in the ultralight?

    Does the new tarmac have a dedicated version of the bend?

    Thanks in advance for your support!!
    Sul sito specialized è impossibile vederlo,il buco è dietro in corrispondenza dell’attacco manubrio. Chiedi al tuo rivenditore e te lo dovrebbe confermare.

  24. #199
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    42
    Quote Originally Posted by Cni2i View Post


    Just need direct mounted brakes. DA of course are great performing brakes and relatively not too $ compared with ee brakes. But getting a very light frame and using heavier brakes than what I currently use (Std ee brakes) somewhat negates the weight savings of the UL frame, no?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    810 for UL frame. That's quite heavy. Didn't you mention earlier 733 for size 56? Or is that without seatpost?

  25. #200
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: Cni2i's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,792
    Yes. 733 I️ believe is just the frame. No fork. No seatpost.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    EyeGuy

Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ... 6789 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. 2018 Mid-Term DNC Platform Proprosal
    By troutmd in forum Politics Only
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-06-2017, 05:24 PM
  2. FYI........Calaveras road closed until 2018
    By ghettocop in forum Northern California
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 07-16-2016, 09:21 PM
  3. US urges FIFA not to let russia host world cup 2018
    By kiwisimon in forum Politics Only
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 04-02-2015, 09:55 PM
  4. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 02-24-2015, 12:55 PM
  5. Oil Not Priced in Dollars by 2018?
    By KenB in forum Politics Only
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 10-07-2009, 02:43 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •