2015 Specialized 'New Tarmac' (not SL5 it seems?)
Moderator: robbosmans
- ophiravina
- Posts: 129
- Joined: Thu Sep 26, 2013 5:44 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VDZbOQBu1wg
specialized introduced the SL5, they say that main diffrence between it and the SL4 is that they designed every frame size differently.
the bigger sizes are stiffer and the smaller sizes have more flex....
plus, it's lighter thanks to internal seatpost clamp and a new carbon layup.
bikerumor:
http://www.bikerumor.com/2014/05/10/spe ... ke-models/
specialized introduced the SL5, they say that main diffrence between it and the SL4 is that they designed every frame size differently.
the bigger sizes are stiffer and the smaller sizes have more flex....
plus, it's lighter thanks to internal seatpost clamp and a new carbon layup.
bikerumor:
http://www.bikerumor.com/2014/05/10/spe ... ke-models/
Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓ Broad Selection ✓ Worldwide Delivery ✓
www.starbike.com
-
- Posts: 328
- Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2012 7:17 pm
They did, according to THIS. Before they took a 56 as average and scaled it, but now they're developing unique bikes for every size. I've always liked Tarmacs, but no thru-axels and that proprietary rear hub puts me off.
good info on weight....
honest frame weight's
no thru-axle. major defect. spec should know better looking at the history of qr in the mtb world.
http://www.bicycling.com/bikes-gear/new ... c?page=0,1
honest frame weight's
The new bike will be available in three versions, setup for either hydraulic discs or rim brakes: The Pro and Expert options use the same frame, but come with different components; the S-Works uses higher-grade carbon that weighs 100 to 120 grams less. Specialized has not yet released prices or production weights, but the company claims that a painted S-Works frame weighs 966 grams and the fork comes in at 360 grams.
no thru-axle. major defect. spec should know better looking at the history of qr in the mtb world.
http://www.bicycling.com/bikes-gear/new ... c?page=0,1
Current Rides:
2023 Tarmac SL7 Di2 9270
ex 2019 S-works SL6
ex 2018 Trek Madone SLR Disc
ex 2016 Giant TCRAdvanced Sl
ex 2012 Trek Madone7
2023 Tarmac SL7 Di2 9270
ex 2019 S-works SL6
ex 2018 Trek Madone SLR Disc
ex 2016 Giant TCRAdvanced Sl
ex 2012 Trek Madone7
Uran's SL reviewed by GCN
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9NTyXUYNflA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9NTyXUYNflA
-
- Posts: 443
- Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2013 6:23 am
- Contact:
I'm surprised there isn't a thru-axle either. I would think more companies besides Trek would have thru-axles.
dynaserve wrote:Very disappointing: Heavy, expensive and no aero-enhancements.
I was expecting so much more, something like a super-light Tarmac/Venge hybrid.
This could be coming when Spesh releases the McLaren Tarmac in July. I am sure it will be $$$$$$$$$ and hopefully lighter than the normal S-Works. Rumor is integrated seat post as well.
- ophiravina
- Posts: 129
- Joined: Thu Sep 26, 2013 5:44 pm
looks like specialized never called the new bike "tarmac sl5", they just said "2015 s-works tarmac", I dont think that there is any diffrence exept the seat collar for the middle sizes (54,56)... maybe even the 58 stayed the same... furtheremore, I think that the sl4 will be better for some pepole.
specialized made the bike stiffer and heavier for the bigger sizes becouse they assumed that taller riders are heavier, but what about all those skiny climbers that are 1.84 and 67 kilo, do they really a bike that is so stiff? I would prefer the lighter SL4 and to feel comfortable on the rough sections....
maybe its just me, but I think they should have made the bike less stiff then the SL4, not in the BB area, but in the head tube, the sl4 is not the most comfortable bike on rough roads, compered to the SL2. and from my experience when you feel comfortable you are faster... that's the reason for the sucsess of the allez race, CAAD10 and all those ti and steel bikes. I personaly wouldn't buy one of those becouse of the weight, but I would be intrested in a lighter, more comfortable tarmac.
maybe specialized plans to do an sl5 in 2016? a bike that will be lighter and maybe even more aero, because of the specialized wind tunnel
this one looks like an SL 4s
specialized made the bike stiffer and heavier for the bigger sizes becouse they assumed that taller riders are heavier, but what about all those skiny climbers that are 1.84 and 67 kilo, do they really a bike that is so stiff? I would prefer the lighter SL4 and to feel comfortable on the rough sections....
maybe its just me, but I think they should have made the bike less stiff then the SL4, not in the BB area, but in the head tube, the sl4 is not the most comfortable bike on rough roads, compered to the SL2. and from my experience when you feel comfortable you are faster... that's the reason for the sucsess of the allez race, CAAD10 and all those ti and steel bikes. I personaly wouldn't buy one of those becouse of the weight, but I would be intrested in a lighter, more comfortable tarmac.
maybe specialized plans to do an sl5 in 2016? a bike that will be lighter and maybe even more aero, because of the specialized wind tunnel
this one looks like an SL 4s
-
- Posts: 86
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 4:18 pm
- Location: phoenix, az
^this. They may have paid attention to the smaller sizes by improving the ride quality, but their geo in the small sizes is wonky
Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓ Broad Selection ✓ Worldwide Delivery ✓
www.starbike.com
Few things spring to mind.ave wrote:What do you think, spartan, why did Spec omit thru axle?
I'm pretty sure they have heard of it. I'd think they probably tested the new frame a bit before bringing it to market.
Specialized engineers are likely to know how to do QRs up properly, but then, as regularly demonstrated, a huge number of people have no idea.
They are also unlikely to use cheap arris lightweight chinese skewers with stretchy shafts and plastic bushes, as its not likely to actually make any noticeable difference to their result in the sprint for the cafe.
Or use kit thats far far far beyond its best before date. And knackered.
Or lash together some half arrised attempt at "performance gain" or "weight reduction" without knowing what the hell they are playing at (as often seen in the MTB world.)
Just my thoughts.