ride differences? TCR Advanced Pro vs TCR Advanced SL
Moderator: robbosmans
Hi! I'm looking for a new road bike to replace an older Cannondale Caad7. I haven't narrowed my search completely, but after some trips to the local shop, I'm most interested in the 2016 Giant TCR Advanced Pro 0 vs the TCR Advanced SL. I'm going to test ride the TCR Advanced Pro today, but of course they don't have the SL version built up and I would not be able to test ride before buying. Dude at the shop was very nice and helpful but he also made his obligatory sales pitch about how the SL version "is just a little more snappy and responsive and fun to ride." I know the SL will be lighter - but to be honest, the Advanced Pro 0 is lighter than anything I've ever ridden, so I'm not too worried about the weight difference.
I have read that the ISP with the SL makes for a more comfortable ride. If anyone has any insight into how the two compare, I'd love to hear it. Thanks!
I have read that the ISP with the SL makes for a more comfortable ride. If anyone has any insight into how the two compare, I'd love to hear it. Thanks!
Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓ Broad Selection ✓ Worldwide Delivery ✓
www.starbike.com
I wouldn't want a bike with a ISP so if you love the Advanced Pro I'd say go for it. Is it not comfortable enough? Is that why you are looking at the other model with the ISP?
As already mentioned, I'd be wary of the ISP feature. Given a choice of two bikes which are more or less identical, I know which I would choose. And once I own a bike, its mine forever. No reselling of my bikes. But just in case, no thanks to the ISP concept.
-
- Posts: 683
- Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2012 3:40 am
Get the PRO 0 just because you don't have to mess with a stupid ISP. Can't believe they're still around on non custom geo bikes.
mimason wrote: but has ISP which provides addltional comfort but at the expense of
When did ISP provide additional comfort? I've heard the tales of compact frames with extra long seatposts being more comfortable because the seatpost could flex. And frames using skinnier 27.2 seatposts rather than larger 31.6 seatposts so the skinnier seatpost could flex more for comfort. But how does the larger diameter ISP add comfort?
Not sure the basis for the posts about not offering good ride quality comes from but I'm sure it can vary from bike and manufacturer. My comments above was related to the Giant model only where you cant buy after market posts. I never advocated ISP for the record.
Giant purports in their ISP perfectly balances compliance and efficiency. SO basically they are saying that they can tune the ISP to create a certain ride quality and characteristic. This could mean more comfort etc through the design. Obviously, if bikes have standard sizing posts anyone could buy after market posts to tune the ride too. This is a given. Also, I don't recall where this is posted but Wilier changed the ISP to standard posts on their '16 model Cento1SR. They claimed that the new model would be not be as compliant as the ISP model but the move was to broaden their audience etc. You can read between the lines on this. Interestingly, I actually passed up on a new old stock deal for an ISP Cento1SR since you cannot test ride ISPs and all the other reasons.
I can say I own an '11 ISP SL('09 SL ISP before that) and demoed the non ISP way back when.... I don't recall the difference but do know the Giant rep and that's what they say. YMMV
Finally, when I was in the market for a new bike I opted to stay away from ISP from any manufacturer due to previously stated info.
Giant purports in their ISP perfectly balances compliance and efficiency. SO basically they are saying that they can tune the ISP to create a certain ride quality and characteristic. This could mean more comfort etc through the design. Obviously, if bikes have standard sizing posts anyone could buy after market posts to tune the ride too. This is a given. Also, I don't recall where this is posted but Wilier changed the ISP to standard posts on their '16 model Cento1SR. They claimed that the new model would be not be as compliant as the ISP model but the move was to broaden their audience etc. You can read between the lines on this. Interestingly, I actually passed up on a new old stock deal for an ISP Cento1SR since you cannot test ride ISPs and all the other reasons.
I can say I own an '11 ISP SL('09 SL ISP before that) and demoed the non ISP way back when.... I don't recall the difference but do know the Giant rep and that's what they say. YMMV
Finally, when I was in the market for a new bike I opted to stay away from ISP from any manufacturer due to previously stated info.
Last edited by mimason on Wed Nov 18, 2015 3:41 pm, edited 4 times in total.
RussellS wrote:mimason wrote: but has ISP which provides addltional comfort but at the expense of
When did ISP provide additional comfort? I've heard the tales of compact frames with extra long seatposts being more comfortable because the seatpost could flex. And frames using skinnier 27.2 seatposts rather than larger 31.6 seatposts so the skinnier seatpost could flex more for comfort. But how does the larger diameter ISP add comfort?
Does the Giant offer 27.2 posts? No.
I am only commenting on the Giant TCR not ISP in general.
Last edited by mimason on Wed Nov 18, 2015 2:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I've never ridden either bike. That said, the ISP should offer better ride quality because the mfg can use more aggressive design specs at top tube seat tube junction since it doesn't have to incorporate as much hoop strength, or account for varying stress distributions due to different seat post heights/insertions. equally, the seatpost doesn't need to have high hoop strength or compensate for varying leverage points/extension.
Does it make a difference you can rate? who knows. and the above criticisms are all valid, and likely the isp is the last 5% of the equation, so may not be worth it.
Does it make a difference you can rate? who knows. and the above criticisms are all valid, and likely the isp is the last 5% of the equation, so may not be worth it.
I have been looking at a brand that has an ISP and love everything about it, except for the ISP. However that ISP keeps me from buying it for several reasons noted. It really does limit a resale market and does lower the used value. Face it we all think we will keep that bike till death do you part. Not true you will need to sell it some day
Scott
Scott
Let's finish the ride with a 20% grade.
2011 Scott Addict R1 DA 7900 Matt black
2012 Scott CR1 Pro Ultegra 6700
2015 Specialized SWorks Tarmac Da 9000
2016 Specialized SWorks Tarmac DA 9100
2011 Scott Addict R1 DA 7900 Matt black
2012 Scott CR1 Pro Ultegra 6700
2015 Specialized SWorks Tarmac Da 9000
2016 Specialized SWorks Tarmac DA 9100
Thanks for all the input! I'm not sure where the idea that the ISP version was somehow more comfortable came from - a comment I read here or a similar forum probably. I've mostly decided that I don't want the ISP version. I am still curious about the ride differences - curious about the ride differences between "nice" and "nicer" framesets in general like Tarmac vs S-Works version, R3 vs R5, etc. But given that I've been on the same aluminum frame for >10 years, I think the "nice" version will feel like plenty of an upgrade.
I went to the shop and test road the TCR Advanced Pro 0 yesterday. It was awesome! Hard to know a ton from a 20 minute test ride, but it felt fun and fast! I also tried a 2015 Cervelo R3 that they have on close-out. That felt nice too and after the shop swapped the wheel set from the Giant onto the Cervelo, the R3 felt similarly snappy and fun. So at this point, I'm actually leaning toward the R3 with a wheel upgrade. The Giant would be with Dura Ace and the Cervelo with Ultegra. But the shop has offered to upgrade the wheel set on the Cervelo to the same wheels on the Giant and with that upgrade, it's $1000 cheaper.
If anyone with experience with the Giant wheel set can chime in, I'd love to hear how they hold up. I gather they're new this year, so probably not a lot of long term experience out there. On paper they look pretty great.
I went to the shop and test road the TCR Advanced Pro 0 yesterday. It was awesome! Hard to know a ton from a 20 minute test ride, but it felt fun and fast! I also tried a 2015 Cervelo R3 that they have on close-out. That felt nice too and after the shop swapped the wheel set from the Giant onto the Cervelo, the R3 felt similarly snappy and fun. So at this point, I'm actually leaning toward the R3 with a wheel upgrade. The Giant would be with Dura Ace and the Cervelo with Ultegra. But the shop has offered to upgrade the wheel set on the Cervelo to the same wheels on the Giant and with that upgrade, it's $1000 cheaper.
If anyone with experience with the Giant wheel set can chime in, I'd love to hear how they hold up. I gather they're new this year, so probably not a lot of long term experience out there. On paper they look pretty great.
Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓ Broad Selection ✓ Worldwide Delivery ✓
www.starbike.com
Thanks for the info in this thread as I'm also looking at the Advanced Pro (though I'm looking at the Advanced Pro 1, not the Advanced Pro 0).
For what it's worth, here's a review in Peloton saying they prefer the Advanced Pro 0 over the SL with the ISP:
http://pelotonmagazine.com/tested/giant-tcr-advanced-pro-0-review-images/
For what it's worth, here's a review in Peloton saying they prefer the Advanced Pro 0 over the SL with the ISP:
http://pelotonmagazine.com/tested/giant-tcr-advanced-pro-0-review-images/