Help me decide - Giant TCR Advanced 2 vs. Advanced Pro 0 Disc

Discuss light weight issues concerning road bikes & parts.
devonbiker
Posts: 38
Joined: Wed May 30, 2018 1:26 pm

by devonbiker

zirxo wrote:
Thu May 31, 2018 7:24 am
Don't forget that the non-pro TCR comes with an alu steerer instead of carbon on the pro version.
From what I have read, this makes no difference to the handling but it reduces overall bike weight. The carbon steerer and Ultegra groupset basically offset the weight gain from having the discs. But you still have those heavy disc wheels.

When I think about it, the two most important things on a bike are frame and wheels, with this comparison the frame on the £1300 bike is the same quality as the frame on the £3600 bike. Then if you put a set of high performance tubeless rim wheels (1400g) on the cheaper bike, you then have a better performing bike (in dry conditions) with the same frame and you will be £1600 better off, and that's before you sell the stock wheels which come with the bike.

by Weenie


zirxo
Posts: 161
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2014 12:46 pm

by zirxo

If I remember correctly the carbon steerer is also beefier than the alu one with a 1 1/4" diameter instead of 1 11/8.

devonbiker
Posts: 38
Joined: Wed May 30, 2018 1:26 pm

by devonbiker

zirxo wrote:
Thu May 31, 2018 12:00 pm
If I remember correctly the carbon steerer is also beefier than the alu one with a 1 1/4" diameter instead of 1 11/8.
Still doesn't make it any faster in a straight line though. I doubt I would be able to tell as I don't race.

jlok
Posts: 552
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2015 3:30 am

by jlok

It's ww here so no doubt go for the lightest option. End of story.
Giant Propel Advanced SL Disc 1 < Propel Adv < TCR Adv SL Disc < KTM Revelator Sky < CAAD 12 Disc < Domane S Disc < Alize < CAAD 10

User avatar
themidge
Posts: 623
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2017 4:19 pm
Location: Auld Reekie

by themidge

It sounds to me like you can afford to spend the price of the disc bike on a more expensive rim brake bike with carbon steerer, lighter wheels, higher tier groupset, just generally better-er, or am I mistaken?

P.S. If you can, don't get an alloy steerer, they may be foolproof, but they're mega heavy and no stiffer than carbon ones. When you start to upgrade, you don't want to be hindered by your frameset.
:hello:
Cannondale Supersix 2008 (weight: 7.3kg)
B'twin Triban 540 (in bits)
Vitus "Benotto" 979 (weight: :? )

amngwlvs
Posts: 50
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2018 2:45 pm

by amngwlvs

devonbiker wrote:
Thu May 31, 2018 9:26 am
zirxo wrote:
Thu May 31, 2018 7:24 am
Don't forget that the non-pro TCR comes with an alu steerer instead of carbon on the pro version.
From what I have read, this makes no difference to the handling but it reduces overall bike weight. The carbon steerer and Ultegra groupset basically offset the weight gain from having the discs. But you still have those heavy disc wheels.

When I think about it, the two most important things on a bike are frame and wheels, with this comparison the frame on the £1300 bike is the same quality as the frame on the £3600 bike. Then if you put a set of high performance tubeless rim wheels (1400g) on the cheaper bike, you then have a better performing bike (in dry conditions) with the same frame and you will be £1600 better off, and that's before you sell the stock wheels which come with the bike.
So the “high performance tubeless rim wheels” = 1420g and “those heavy disc wheels” (also tubeless) = 1508g. I don’t think you can say it would be a better performing bike based on that alone - brakes, groupset, carbon steerer, cockpit. Unless you’re purely climbing I’m sure the extra depth on the disc wheels and the above would more than account for the 88g.

If you’re wanting to make the frame the biggest priority I have the feeling down the road you’d prefer the 1 1/4” carbon steerer over the 1 1/8” alloy. No matter how much you upgrade and try to lighten the bike that steerer will have its limitations.
themidge wrote:
Thu May 31, 2018 2:12 pm
It sounds to me like you can afford to spend the price of the disc bike on a more expensive rim brake bike with carbon steerer, lighter wheels, higher tier groupset, just generally better-er, or am I mistaken?

P.S. If you can, don't get an alloy steerer, they may be foolproof, but they're mega heavy and no stiffer than carbon ones. When you start to upgrade, you don't want to be hindered by your frameset.
Valid point. I definitely agree with the second paragraph and the alloy steerer was one of the reasons (among a handful of others) I opted to get a new bike rather than upgrade my Propel.
2018 Giant TCR Advanced Pro 0 Disc
2015 Giant Propel Advanced 2
2013 Trek 520

devonbiker
Posts: 38
Joined: Wed May 30, 2018 1:26 pm

by devonbiker

I'm not sure where you are getting the 1508 grams wheelset weight from. If you are talking about the Giant SLR carbon (disc) wheelset which comes with the TCR Advanced Pro 0 Disc, the front wheel, tyre and rotor alone is 1250g. I know that because I had the same wheelset on my Defy Advanced Pro 1 Disc (2018) and I weighed the front wheel. My rim-brake Mavic Ksyrium Pro UST front wheel + tyre is nearly half that (850g). I therefore figured that it made sense to stick with rim brakes because weight penalty makes it hard to justify, unless you ride in the rain a lot. I mean, what percentage of time during a ride are you applying the brakes? Maybe 10%? The rest of the time you are either climbing or cruising on the flat, when that extra weight is just dead weight.

My Defy Advanced Pro 1 had a carbon steerer and the carbon wheels, but the bike weighed 8.5kg (with pedals). My TCR Advanced 2 should be under 8kg so I'm not too bothered about the fact that the steerer is alloy - it's still a very light bike and represents the best value for money in the TCR range if you ask me. That's why it won Bike Radar Bike of the Year 2018. The Advanced Pro (rim brake) makes sense as it's very light (thanks to full Ultegra and carbon steerer) and the SLR wheelset (non-disc) is also excellent and wouldn't need upgrading, but it's another £1200. I also preferred the orange/red paint job on the Advanced 2. It looks gorgeous in real life. I also think the braking performance is better with the non-carbon rims.

devonbiker
Posts: 38
Joined: Wed May 30, 2018 1:26 pm

by devonbiker

Also, just out of interest, and in keeping with the WW way, I weighed the bike today - 7.47kg in medium/large with two bottle cages and pedals. Not bad for a bike that cost £1350 plus £650 for the wheels, and I have a brand new PR-2 wheelset and tyres which I'll hopefully sell on Ebay for £200, so all in all about £1800, so lighter than the Advanced Pro 0 Disc and HALF the cost.

Hard to justify the disc brake model with that kind of cost/weight penalty, unless you ride all the time in the rain or do a lot of urban cycling IMO.

amngwlvs
Posts: 50
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2018 2:45 pm

by amngwlvs

devonbiker wrote:
Fri Jun 01, 2018 10:11 am
I'm not sure where you are getting the 1508 grams wheelset weight from. If you are talking about the Giant SLR carbon (disc) wheelset which comes with the TCR Advanced Pro 0 Disc, the front wheel, tyre and rotor alone is 1250g. I know that because I had the same wheelset on my Defy Advanced Pro 1 Disc (2018) and I weighed the front wheel. My rim-brake Mavic Ksyrium Pro UST front wheel + tyre is nearly half that (850g). I therefore figured that it made sense to stick with rim brakes because weight penalty makes it hard to justify, unless you ride in the rain a lot. I mean, what percentage of time during a ride are you applying the brakes? Maybe 10%? The rest of the time you are either climbing or cruising on the flat, when that extra weight is just dead weight.

My Defy Advanced Pro 1 had a carbon steerer and the carbon wheels, but the bike weighed 8.5kg (with pedals). My TCR Advanced 2 should be under 8kg so I'm not too bothered about the fact that the steerer is alloy - it's still a very light bike and represents the best value for money in the TCR range if you ask me. That's why it won Bike Radar Bike of the Year 2018. The Advanced Pro (rim brake) makes sense as it's very light (thanks to full Ultegra and carbon steerer) and the SLR wheelset (non-disc) is also excellent and wouldn't need upgrading, but it's another £1200. I also preferred the orange/red paint job on the Advanced 2. It looks gorgeous in real life. I also think the braking performance is better with the non-carbon rims.
I'm getting the 1508g from Giant's website and taking with a grain of salt it's close to correct. I was also assuming that the 1400g you stated was without tires which narrows the gap. Sounds like Giant's tires aren't particularily light base on the 1250g you're getting, which isn't a huge issue for me, they're easy to replace with something lighter down the road. I didn't particularily need discs but wanted them as a future proofing method as I truly feel thats the way the road industry is headed. I'm surprised to hear your Defy was that "heavy". My TCR AP0 with bottle cages and Ultegra pedals came in at 17.7lbs (8.02kgs) which I thought was pretty respectable all things considered.

A few things we'll definitely agree on though - the value of Giant's Advanced range (that's exactly why I bought my Propel Advanced 2 - no better aero bike for the $1950 CAD I paid), the neon red (I wasn't kidding when said the red is gorgeous in real life - no pictures do it justice), and the braking performance of rim brakes on alloy vs carbon.

Congrats on the new ride! Post some pics, I'd love to see it with the new wheels.
2018 Giant TCR Advanced Pro 0 Disc
2015 Giant Propel Advanced 2
2013 Trek 520

LiquidCooled
Posts: 44
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2017 5:46 am

by LiquidCooled

devonbiker wrote:
Fri Jun 01, 2018 1:58 pm
Also, just out of interest, and in keeping with the WW way, I weighed the bike today - 7.47kg in medium/large with two bottle cages and pedals. Not bad for a bike that cost £1350 plus £650 for the wheels, and I have a brand new PR-2 wheelset and tyres which I'll hopefully sell on Ebay for £200, so all in all about £1800, so lighter than the Advanced Pro 0 Disc and HALF the cost.

Hard to justify the disc brake model with that kind of cost/weight penalty, unless you ride all the time in the rain or do a lot of urban cycling IMO.
I don't think it's really fair to compare the two bikes you're comparing on only their weights and saying the rim brake bike is better for half the cost. It's probably better to compare the rim brake bike with the disc bike that is closest in spec: the TCR Advanced 2 Disc (https://www.giant-bicycles.com/gb/tcr-advanced-2-disc). That bike is £300 more than the rim bike you're looking at and, apart from the disc vs rim differences, has the same level of groupset, wheels, frame, and fork.

Before I bought my 2017 TCR APD, I rented a 2017 TCR Advanced 2 (rim) for 4 days. So basically the 2017 versions of the bikes you originally posted about. I rented the rim version just to see how I liked the frame, geometry, etc. Then I bought the APD a month later. For me, the APD felt loads better. Some of that was due to the better stock wheels (which you are adressing), some was due to the better brake feel (but you seem perfectly content with rim brakes, so that's not an issue), some is due to the Ultegra DI2 vs mechanical 105 (for me that was HUGE, but only you can decide for yourself), and some was perhaps due to the other upgraded parts (stem, bars, carbon steerer, etc).

If all one cares about is light weight and 105, then the A2 is a no-brainer. Some of us want other things which more than justify the extra cost of the APD. I would never have bought the A2 as an upgrade to my Cannondale CAAD7 (with Ultegra 6800 group).
2017 Giant TCR Advanced Pro 0 Disc
2003 Cannondale R1000 (CAAD7)

devonbiker
Posts: 38
Joined: Wed May 30, 2018 1:26 pm

by devonbiker

amngwlvs wrote:
Fri Jun 01, 2018 2:35 pm

I'm getting the 1508g from Giant's website and taking with a grain of salt it's close to correct. I was also assuming that the 1400g you stated was without tires which narrows the gap. Sounds like Giant's tires aren't particularily light base on the 1250g you're getting, which isn't a huge issue for me, they're easy to replace with something lighter down the road. I didn't particularily need discs but wanted them as a future proofing method as I truly feel thats the way the road industry is headed. I'm surprised to hear your Defy was that "heavy". My TCR AP0 with bottle cages and Ultegra pedals came in at 17.7lbs (8.02kgs) which I thought was pretty respectable all things considered.

A few things we'll definitely agree on though - the value of Giant's Advanced range (that's exactly why I bought my Propel Advanced 2 - no better aero bike for the $1950 CAD I paid), the neon red (I wasn't kidding when said the red is gorgeous in real life - no pictures do it justice), and the braking performance of rim brakes on alloy vs carbon.

Congrats on the new ride! Post some pics, I'd love to see it with the new wheels.
Maybe Giant quotes the weight of the rims without hubs and rotors? The only true way of knowing is to put the whole wheel on kitchen scales.

I haven't managed to get out and ride the TCR Advanced 2 yet as I failed on getting the Mavic wheels to fit on the bike. I thought it would be as simple as swapping the cassette over but it turns out that the derailleur needs adjustment to accommodate the different hub diameters.

I think I have made the right choice; the new TCR is now a full kilo lighter than my old Defy which it replaces (which was a £2600 bike), and I am £800 better off all things considered, so it seems good value. I admit the Mavic wheels don't look as cool as the aero wheels you get on the Advanced Pro, but they are definately lighter than almost everything that comes with new bikes these days and it should make the bike a pretty good climbing bike for the money.

devonbiker
Posts: 38
Joined: Wed May 30, 2018 1:26 pm

by devonbiker

LiquidCooled wrote:
Fri Jun 01, 2018 3:56 pm
devonbiker wrote:
Fri Jun 01, 2018 1:58 pm
Also, just out of interest, and in keeping with the WW way, I weighed the bike today - 7.47kg in medium/large with two bottle cages and pedals. Not bad for a bike that cost £1350 plus £650 for the wheels, and I have a brand new PR-2 wheelset and tyres which I'll hopefully sell on Ebay for £200, so all in all about £1800, so lighter than the Advanced Pro 0 Disc and HALF the cost.

Hard to justify the disc brake model with that kind of cost/weight penalty, unless you ride all the time in the rain or do a lot of urban cycling IMO.
I don't think it's really fair to compare the two bikes you're comparing on only their weights and saying the rim brake bike is better for half the cost. It's probably better to compare the rim brake bike with the disc bike that is closest in spec: the TCR Advanced 2 Disc (https://www.giant-bicycles.com/gb/tcr-advanced-2-disc). That bike is £300 more than the rim bike you're looking at and, apart from the disc vs rim differences, has the same level of groupset, wheels, frame, and fork.

Before I bought my 2017 TCR APD, I rented a 2017 TCR Advanced 2 (rim) for 4 days. So basically the 2017 versions of the bikes you originally posted about. I rented the rim version just to see how I liked the frame, geometry, etc. Then I bought the APD a month later. For me, the APD felt loads better. Some of that was due to the better stock wheels (which you are adressing), some was due to the better brake feel (but you seem perfectly content with rim brakes, so that's not an issue), some is due to the Ultegra DI2 vs mechanical 105 (for me that was HUGE, but only you can decide for yourself), and some was perhaps due to the other upgraded parts (stem, bars, carbon steerer, etc).

If all one cares about is light weight and 105, then the A2 is a no-brainer. Some of us want other things which more than justify the extra cost of the APD. I would never have bought the A2 as an upgrade to my Cannondale CAAD7 (with Ultegra 6800 group).
I think the other upgraded parts you mention unique to the Pro series are purely for weight reduction - stem, bars, steerer. Also, Ultegra is 330 grams heavier than 105, although functionally speaking it is very similar to 105. However, I have offset these weight increases by the wheelset upgrade which shaves off 0.5kg where it matters the most. We all know that lighter wheels provide a geniune performance upgrade - more than anything else on a bike.

The Advanced Pro (non-disc Ultegra) model is another £800 on top of what I have spent, after I have sold the Giant wheelset. Sure, full Ultegra is nice, and probably feels nicer to use than 105, but I can live without this, and I'm not sure if it's worth another £800.

devonbiker
Posts: 38
Joined: Wed May 30, 2018 1:26 pm

by devonbiker

devonbiker wrote:
Fri Jun 01, 2018 4:29 pm
LiquidCooled wrote:
Fri Jun 01, 2018 3:56 pm
devonbiker wrote:
Fri Jun 01, 2018 1:58 pm
Also, just out of interest, and in keeping with the WW way, I weighed the bike today - 7.47kg in medium/large with two bottle cages and pedals. Not bad for a bike that cost £1350 plus £650 for the wheels, and I have a brand new PR-2 wheelset and tyres which I'll hopefully sell on Ebay for £200, so all in all about £1800, so lighter than the Advanced Pro 0 Disc and HALF the cost.

Hard to justify the disc brake model with that kind of cost/weight penalty, unless you ride all the time in the rain or do a lot of urban cycling IMO.
I don't think it's really fair to compare the two bikes you're comparing on only their weights and saying the rim brake bike is better for half the cost. It's probably better to compare the rim brake bike with the disc bike that is closest in spec: the TCR Advanced 2 Disc (https://www.giant-bicycles.com/gb/tcr-advanced-2-disc). That bike is £300 more than the rim bike you're looking at and, apart from the disc vs rim differences, has the same level of groupset, wheels, frame, and fork.

Before I bought my 2017 TCR APD, I rented a 2017 TCR Advanced 2 (rim) for 4 days. So basically the 2017 versions of the bikes you originally posted about. I rented the rim version just to see how I liked the frame, geometry, etc. Then I bought the APD a month later. For me, the APD felt loads better. Some of that was due to the better stock wheels (which you are adressing), some was due to the better brake feel (but you seem perfectly content with rim brakes, so that's not an issue), some is due to the Ultegra DI2 vs mechanical 105 (for me that was HUGE, but only you can decide for yourself), and some was perhaps due to the other upgraded parts (stem, bars, carbon steerer, etc).

If all one cares about is light weight and 105, then the A2 is a no-brainer. Some of us want other things which more than justify the extra cost of the APD. I would never have bought the A2 as an upgrade to my Cannondale CAAD7 (with Ultegra 6800 group).
I think the other upgraded parts you mention unique to the Pro series are purely for weight reduction - stem, bars, steerer. Also, Ultegra is 330 grams heavier than 105, although functionally speaking it is very similar to 105. However, I have offset these weight increases by the wheelset upgrade which shaves off 0.5kg where it matters the most. We all know that lighter wheels provide a geniune performance upgrade - more than anything else on a bike.

The Advanced Pro (non-disc Ultegra) model is another £800 on top of what I have spent, after I have sold the Giant wheelset. Sure, full Ultegra is nice, and probably feels nicer to use than 105, but I can live without this, and I'm not sure if it's worth another £800.

It's easy to get dragged into price creep in the cycling world. You have to ask yourself if spending 40% more on a bike is going to provide you with cost effective benefit. In this case the extra 40% is not going to get you a faster bike. It just makes things "nicer".

devonbiker
Posts: 38
Joined: Wed May 30, 2018 1:26 pm

by devonbiker

devonbiker wrote:
Fri Jun 01, 2018 4:38 pm
devonbiker wrote:
Fri Jun 01, 2018 4:29 pm
LiquidCooled wrote:
Fri Jun 01, 2018 3:56 pm
devonbiker wrote:
Fri Jun 01, 2018 1:58 pm
Also, just out of interest, and in keeping with the WW way, I weighed the bike today - 7.47kg in medium/large with two bottle cages and pedals. Not bad for a bike that cost £1350 plus £650 for the wheels, and I have a brand new PR-2 wheelset and tyres which I'll hopefully sell on Ebay for £200, so all in all about £1800, so lighter than the Advanced Pro 0 Disc and HALF the cost.

Hard to justify the disc brake model with that kind of cost/weight penalty, unless you ride all the time in the rain or do a lot of urban cycling IMO.
I don't think it's really fair to compare the two bikes you're comparing on only their weights and saying the rim brake bike is better for half the cost. It's probably better to compare the rim brake bike with the disc bike that is closest in spec: the TCR Advanced 2 Disc (https://www.giant-bicycles.com/gb/tcr-advanced-2-disc). That bike is £300 more than the rim bike you're looking at and, apart from the disc vs rim differences, has the same level of groupset, wheels, frame, and fork.

Before I bought my 2017 TCR APD, I rented a 2017 TCR Advanced 2 (rim) for 4 days. So basically the 2017 versions of the bikes you originally posted about. I rented the rim version just to see how I liked the frame, geometry, etc. Then I bought the APD a month later. For me, the APD felt loads better. Some of that was due to the better stock wheels (which you are adressing), some was due to the better brake feel (but you seem perfectly content with rim brakes, so that's not an issue), some is due to the Ultegra DI2 vs mechanical 105 (for me that was HUGE, but only you can decide for yourself), and some was perhaps due to the other upgraded parts (stem, bars, carbon steerer, etc).

If all one cares about is light weight and 105, then the A2 is a no-brainer. Some of us want other things which more than justify the extra cost of the APD. I would never have bought the A2 as an upgrade to my Cannondale CAAD7 (with Ultegra 6800 group).
I think the other upgraded parts you mention unique to the Pro series are purely for weight reduction - stem, bars, steerer. Also, Ultegra is 330 grams heavier than 105, although functionally speaking it is very similar to 105. However, I have offset these weight increases by the wheelset upgrade which shaves off 0.5kg where it matters the most. We all know that lighter wheels provide a geniune performance upgrade - more than anything else on a bike.

The Advanced Pro (non-disc Ultegra) model is another £800 on top of what I have spent, after I have sold the Giant wheelset. Sure, full Ultegra is nice, and probably feels nicer to use than 105, but I can live without this, and I'm not sure if it's worth another £800.

It's easy to get dragged into price creep in the cycling world. You have to ask yourself if spending 40% more on a bike is going to provide you with cost effective benefit. In this case the extra 40% is not going to get you a faster bike. It just makes things "nicer".

by Weenie


devonbiker
Posts: 38
Joined: Wed May 30, 2018 1:26 pm

by devonbiker

I think the other upgraded parts you mention unique to the Pro series are purely for weight reduction - stem, bars, steerer. Also, 105 is 330 grams heavier than Ultegra, although functionally speaking it is very similar to Ultegra. However, I have offset these weight increases by the wheelset upgrade which shaves off 0.5kg where it matters the most. We all know that lighter wheels provide a geniune performance upgrade - more than anything else on a bike.

The Advanced Pro (non-disc Ultegra) model is another £800 on top of what I have spent, after I have sold the Giant wheelset. Sure, full Ultegra is nice, and probably feels nicer to use than 105, but I can live without this, and I'm not sure if it's worth another £800.

It's easy to get dragged into price creep in the cycling world. You have to ask yourself if spending 40% more on a bike is going to provide you with cost effective benefit. In this case the extra 40% is not going to get you a faster bike. It just makes things "nicer".
Last edited by devonbiker on Fri Jun 01, 2018 7:08 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post