What are the strengths/weaknesses of Specialized Tarmac Sl3, Sl4 to Canondale Six evo?
(front/rear stiffness, climbing, descending)

I'd say that the Tarmacs have a bit stiffer rear end than the EVO. The EVO is probably a tad lighter overall. The SL4 and the SL3 have different head tube sizes on the bottom. The SL4 downsized the bottom hs bearing a bit from 1 1/4 to 1 3/8. So, it's supposed to be a little less harsh on the front end. From what I understand if you are a big guy or a high watt sprinter type the EVO may be a little whippy in the back end for you. My personal opinion is that stiffness is a marketing gimmick that doesn't really apply to most riders, like me. Yes, you want a properly stiff bike. Stiffness is one factor in creating a good handling bike, but certainly not the only. If I were choosing between the three I'd pick based on fit and ride.

I had a Tarmac SL3 pro and sold it due to the downhill ride, you can pull a a load of bricks up hill if the engine is there I really wanted a better bike for the fast downhills and chipseal roads in Oregon. I just bought a EVO 2(sram red) for what I was looking for it is perfect!

I still have the Scott Addict R1, with the new Evo the Addict may hit the road as well.

_________________
Let's finish the ride with a 20% grade.
2011 Scott Addict R1 Matt black
2012 Cannondale EVO "Storm Trooper" white and black

hey guys

I've been reading about these two bikes for three months right now. Things I know are:

- The SS was elected "best bike in the world" by tour
- The SL4 is more responsive than the SS
- BB stiffness of SS were considered one weakness of the frame
- For crits the best choice is SL4; For long rides and climbs the SS

Anyone out there has a review of the SS comparing SL4 ? Is the SS sluggish (I read it on a review). I'm not a racer but I like to hammer the pedals on short hilly rides.

thanks

If the ss is stiff enough for liquigas cannondale team riders, it will be stiff enough for us too.
According to Giant bb stiffness tests, if you want the stiffest option get the supersix, and not evo.

_________________
2012 Cannondale SuperX
2013 Cannondale Supersix Evo

Any of the top 7-10 frames on that test are as good as even. You can't out out enough power to tell the difference in BB stiffness. You need to look at torsional stiffness as well to get a good idea of what is going to be a responsive frame.

That's a lot of absolutes you've thrown around there leooliva.

There are plenty of threads on both bikes on here and you will find both are great.

Start with which fits best, as that's going to provide you with the best outcome.

_________________
Baum Ristretto, Baum Mondrian Corretto & the '89 Merckx! | "If you could eat it in one sitting, hold your line." | twitter.com/Tinea_Pedis

I tested both side by side a few weeks back, both in size 58, both with new Red group. 3-4 hours each.
The wheels probably colored the way the bikes felt, Vision low profile tubulars on the SS vs mid profile Roval carbon clinchers on the SL4.

I loved both bikes, but the SL4 were almost uncomfortably stiff with the current setup. Rough roads and potholes hit you like a hammer. The Cannondale was also on the aggressive side, but behaved just like I preferred it to in every aspect. I would change a few components on the Cannondale, but the significant price difference would easily allow that (3-4000€). I would say the Cannondale BB and front is plenty stiff, at least for my 85 kg.

Evo and Tarmac sl4 are both very good bikes. It comes down to personal preferences. The same when it comes down to buying a premium car. Do you want to buy a Mercedes, an Audi or a BMW.
I bought the Tarmac Sl4 S-Works because I feel more emotion with Specialized. The Tarmac S-works is my dream bike. The Cannondale SS Evo is a beautiful bike but I don't like traditional looking frames like the Cannondales. I want the top tube (light) slooping. If I had the money I would also buy a Cannondale SS EVO, a Colnago C59, a Parlee Z5SL custom paint and a Cervelo R5 SL.

_________________
Specialized Tarmac S-works SL4
http://i891.photobucket.com/albums/ac11 ... 11af34.jpg

2 months ago I changed frames from a s-works sl3 to a 2012 supersix evo. The Evo is lighter by 1/2 lb or so and has a much smoother ride. Over poor roads the evo sucks up the bumps much better. I am only 150 lb's and more of a climber than sprinter so rear end stiffness was not an issue for me. I also liked they way the evo handled in the corners. The sl3 would be twitchy on long drawn out corners but the evo held it's line more. The s-works frame does look a little sexier in my opinion with nice curves. The Evo has a shorter head tube and more space for wider rims on the back. I believe the Zipp cautions sl3 and sl4 users that the 303 might rub on the chainstays. I liked both bikes but prefer my Evo. I which Cannondale would make some better looking frame colors/ graphics. I agree with poppiholla that both bikes are good hopefully you can try both and pick the one you like better

Following a particularly lame set of hill repeats four years ago, I made this plot:



On my at-that-time PR up the climb (I've since gone a bit faster) my average pedal force was 39% body weight. That's 66.3 BW-mm of torque. The difference between the Evo and S6 is 17.89 N/m of stiffness, but more relevantly 0.00362 mm/N of compliance. [url=http://www.giant-bicycles.com/backoffice/_upload_au/WinWithGiant–RoadFrameTestData–FINAL.pdf]The Giant test is detailed here[/url]. I'm not sure the crank length but will assume 172.5 mm. I need to divide by crank length to convert to deflection per unit torque. That's 21.0×10-6 / N deflection per unit torque.

So torque is typically 66.3 BW-mm. For body mass = 75 kg = 735 N, that's 48730.5 N-mm. So climbing at over 5W/kg at this cadence works out to 1.02 mm deflection difference between the two frames.

Will that be felt?

Okay, in a sprint it would be more force, and peak force is bigger than average, so maybe it blows out to 4 mm.

I know that I've ridden the Look 595 and the Evo and thought both were awesome: the two most positive test ride experiences I've had (which isn't many). But I'm 57 kg so if you're 88 kg like that guy who passed me last week climbing Mt Tam on his Specialized Allez Race deflections are proportionately greater Personally I think a bit of bottom bracket movement is good for descending feel: it takes out some of the high frequency vibrations when cornering. But that's just my guess. I've not ridden enough bikes.

_________________
http://djconnel.blogspot.com/
Fuji SL/1
Send your data to Weight Weenie listings!

i have an sworks sl3 and an evo. i prefer the sl3 for sprinting, might be the aero q rings compared to lighter ocp3 rings, the evo rides much nicer. i prefer the evo for climbing, but it does weigh 1.5 kg less. both frames are great.

_________________
Evo 5.63kg SL3 7.045kg viewtopic.php?f=10&t=110579" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I've had both and am currently on the Evo. It is the best frame I have ever owned or ridden.

Evo is smoother and stiffer feeling all around, but mainly at the BB.

Honestly I wasn't too impressed with the SL4 over the SL3. Smoother, but felt more muted and vague overall. The internal routing sucked IMO and it never shifted as well as normal external cables.

This is largely untrue.

The SL4 is not "more responsive". The Evo has a shorter wheelbase, lower headtube and often a more aggressive headtube depending on the size. Also, the BB is lower depending on the size.

The SS Evo is not sluggish. The first day I owned it I did a sprint workout and I have a decent sprint. I actually race bikes and can tell you that it feels just as stuff as my Caad 10's did and the same as the Sl4, maybe better.

The better bike depends on what you want. The SL4 has more upright Fred geo. Sorry, that's just the truth. The Sl4 has much more stack in any given size than a Supersix. The SL4 also has more front center. To me, this would be a worse crit bike because it would likely have slower turn in plus its much higher in the front. I run a 79cm saddle height and around 120-125mm of drop with classic bend bars. On an Evo this is a -8 slammed, on an SL4 I'd have to use a -17 or something more aggressive to get the same position.

The biggest difference is out of the saddle climbing. The SL4 always felt muted and sluggish in this regard whereas my SS feels snappy. I've said good and bad things about my old Guru, but the SS is the only other frame I've ridden that has this weird, but awesome characteristic.

This isn't to say the SL4 is a bad bike and I'm splitting hairs but I would choose the SS over it any day of the week. I also felt that the SL4 cut corners in a lot of regards specifically with the cable routing.