Specialized S-Works Tarmac SL8

[bcarvalho]

Why spec a 160mm rear disc?

Because not everyone is small and weighs 60 kg. Not everyone lives in flat regions.
Many bikes are delivered with 160mm f/r fir larger frames (my Scott Addict RC or Canyon Aeroad).

‘In my opinion a pair of 140mm rotors look nicest, but as many riders are over 80kg there is a chance braking performance can be affected in certain conditions,’ says Giacomo Sartore, groupset product manager at Campagnolo.‘This is why we recommend either a pair of 160mm rotors or 160mm front, 140mm rear. With those options a rider can drag their brakes all the way down the Stelvio and not suffer any dip in performance.’

Sram’s road product manager, Brad Menna, agrees: ‘We recommend 160mm for road applications. That’s what provides the most power and best system performance for the widest range of riders and uses.’

Shimano’s Ben Hillsdon also agrees, and explains why 160mm rotors might be better able to cope in certain situations.

I'm 55 kg and I wouldn't go with a 140mm front. My setup is 160 front and 140 rear. 160 mm front makes all the difference. Ultegra pistons with Galfer rotors work great. And I live in a place where you get 15% inclinations quite frequently.

[cyclespeed]

Why spec a 160mm rear disc?

Because not everyone is small and weighs 60 kg. Not everyone lives in flat regions.
Many bikes are delivered with 160mm f/r fir larger frames (my Scott Addict RC or Canyon Aeroad).

‘In my opinion a pair of 140mm rotors look nicest, but as many riders are over 80kg there is a chance braking performance can be affected in certain conditions,’ says Giacomo Sartore, groupset product manager at Campagnolo.‘This is why we recommend either a pair of 160mm rotors or 160mm front, 140mm rear. With those options a rider can drag their brakes all the way down the Stelvio and not suffer any dip in performance.’

Sram’s road product manager, Brad Menna, agrees: ‘We recommend 160mm for road applications. That’s what provides the most power and best system performance for the widest range of riders and uses.’
Shimano’s Ben Hillsdon also agrees, and explains why 160mm rotors might be better able to cope in certain situations.

I weigh 65kg and live and ride in Mallorca, full of hills and mountains.

For brakes I would never run what 'looked nice' as they are a critical part of performance.

I've tried 140mm front and it just doesn't produce enough stopping power if you want to descend properly. It can also overheat more easily.

However, with my 140, I can lock the rear easily at any time, and I would bet that most riders could do the same. When descending the vast majority of braking should be done with the front, the rear is just a stabiliser. A 160 rear makes sense on a gravel bike (weight further back, bigger tyres), but less so on a road bike.

Look at any decent motorbike to see 2 big discs up front and a little one in the back. Braking transfers the weight to the front tyre so you can exert huge forces here, but by the same token, takes weight off the rear, meaning even light forces can lock the rear.

[tylermenard]

Anyone got the SL8 decals in EPS/SVG format? Specifically after the Tarmac one but all of them would be a great help!

Re-posting as surely someone must have these???

I would be also interested, thanks!

Does this work?
https://seeklogo.com/search?q=specializ ... e%20decals

[HBike]

Why spec a 160mm rear disc?

Because not everyone is small and weighs 60 kg. Not everyone lives in flat regions.
Many bikes are delivered with 160mm f/r fir larger frames (my Scott Addict RC or Canyon Aeroad).

‘In my opinion a pair of 140mm rotors look nicest, but as many riders are over 80kg there is a chance braking performance can be affected in certain conditions,’ says Giacomo Sartore, groupset product manager at Campagnolo.‘This is why we recommend either a pair of 160mm rotors or 160mm front, 140mm rear. With those options a rider can drag their brakes all the way down the Stelvio and not suffer any dip in performance.’

Sram’s road product manager, Brad Menna, agrees: ‘We recommend 160mm for road applications. That’s what provides the most power and best system performance for the widest range of riders and uses.’
Shimano’s Ben Hillsdon also agrees, and explains why 160mm rotors might be better able to cope in certain situations.

I weigh 65kg and live and ride in Mallorca, full of hills and mountains.

For brakes I would never run what 'looked nice' as they are a critical part of performance.

I've tried 140mm front and it just doesn't produce enough stopping power if you want to descend properly. It can also overheat more easily.

However, with my 140, I can lock the rear easily at any time, and I would bet that most riders could do the same. When descending the vast majority of braking should be done with the front, the rear is just a stabiliser. A 160 rear makes sense on a gravel bike (weight further back, bigger tyres), but less so on a road bike.

Look at any decent motorbike to see 2 big discs up front and a little one in the back. Braking transfers the weight to the front tyre so you can exert huge forces here, but by the same token, takes weight off the rear, meaning even light forces can lock the rear.

I am 90 kg and 6-2. I did test 140 mm in the rear and found the 160 mm to be better _for me_. I always use both brakes simultaneously and I need less hand force with larger discs.

[Tpduke112]

Why spec a 160mm rear disc?

Because not everyone is small and weighs 60 kg. Not everyone lives in flat regions.
Many bikes are delivered with 160mm f/r fir larger frames (my Scott Addict RC or Canyon Aeroad).

‘In my opinion a pair of 140mm rotors look nicest, but as many riders are over 80kg there is a chance braking performance can be affected in certain conditions,’ says Giacomo Sartore, groupset product manager at Campagnolo.‘This is why we recommend either a pair of 160mm rotors or 160mm front, 140mm rear. With those options a rider can drag their brakes all the way down the Stelvio and not suffer any dip in performance.’

Sram’s road product manager, Brad Menna, agrees: ‘We recommend 160mm for road applications. That’s what provides the most power and best system performance for the widest range of riders and uses.’
Shimano’s Ben Hillsdon also agrees, and explains why 160mm rotors might be better able to cope in certain situations.

I weigh 65kg and live and ride in Mallorca, full of hills and mountains.

For brakes I would never run what 'looked nice' as they are a critical part of performance.

I've tried 140mm front and it just doesn't produce enough stopping power if you want to descend properly. It can also overheat more easily.

However, with my 140, I can lock the rear easily at any time, and I would bet that most riders could do the same. When descending the vast majority of braking should be done with the front, the rear is just a stabiliser. A 160 rear makes sense on a gravel bike (weight further back, bigger tyres), but less so on a road bike.

Look at any decent motorbike to see 2 big discs up front and a little one in the back. Braking transfers the weight to the front tyre so you can exert huge forces here, but by the same token, takes weight off the rear, meaning even light forces can lock the rear.

I am 90 kg and 6-2. I did test 140 mm in the rear and found the 160 mm to be better _for me_. I always use both brakes simultaneously and I need less hand force with larger discs.

Yea, I'm 84 kg and agree with this.

[olliekav]

Anyone got the SL8 decals in EPS/SVG format? Specifically after the Tarmac one but all of them would be a great help!

Re-posting as surely someone must have these???

I would be also interested, thanks!

Does this work?
https://seeklogo.com/search?q=specializ ... e%20decals

None of these have the new Tarmac logo in vector (from SL7 onwards). I've looked everywhere.

[sheldonsmith]

Check with your local bike painter/frame repair; they have a method for creating laser-cut templates for painting logos onto frames. Perhaps they can create vector images for you (without violating copyright...)

[stevec1975]

I looked for ages for S-Works SL8 decals, so I could get them printed myself. I came to the conclusion that none exists/are publicly available, hence I went with speedydecals.

[olliekav]

I looked for ages for S-Works SL8 decals, so I could get them printed myself. I came to the conclusion that none exists/are publicly available, hence I went with speedydecals.

Yep, I've used them previously but I have a Cricut and wanted to DIY it. The smaller prints with sharp edges (like the Tarmac logo) come of so easily just by wiping down the bike will be much easier to print my own.

[Jz91]

I'm not sure what to do about this paint defect on the new bike (which I rode for a total of 4 times).

Should I open a claim? I know it's tiny but also kind of annoying to have it on a new bike.

[Greny]

Anyone know the weight of this frame ? Heavy paintjob ?

[Noro]

I'm not sure what to do about this paint defect on the new bike (which I rode for a total of 4 times).

Should I open a claim? I know it's tiny but also kind of annoying to have it on a new bike.

It depends on the country. In Germany I've made a claim for something worse and just got S-Works shoes in return with a written agreement that if I face more issues with the frame I can bring it back.

[bcarvalho]

I'm not sure what to do about this paint defect on the new bike (which I rode for a total of 4 times).

Should I open a claim? I know it's tiny but also kind of annoying to have it on a new bike.

I would do. Specially at that location which is not hidden.
My frame came with some painting defects like over thickness droplets of paint but not so noticeable because the dark paintjob. Painting quality from specialized is becoming shittier.

Also my roval cockpit came with a painting defect on the stem region. The coat was cracking near the bolts.

In the meantime I submitted my fork for warranty and I'm waiting for spesh response.
Even though the bike rides great the experience is being shitty with quality related problems

[ill principe]

I'm not sure what to do about this paint defect on the new bike (which I rode for a total of 4 times).

Should I open a claim? I know it's tiny but also kind of annoying to have it on a new bike.

Hard to tell from the pictures; but is it a paint defect, actually originating from the paint process? The rode for a total of 4 times is the tricky part here, since it looks like it could be a rock chip. Was it there when you got the bike? If you want to open claim I think time is of the essence. If it isnt covered (no pun indended) by dealer/brand it looks like it could be covered using matte clear touch-up paint (done with a needle or super thin brush).

Being a bit OCD myself I always inspect all new things meticulously before using them to be able to have them returned/corrected. I once had a Cervelo S5 frameset replaced due to bad QC (and my last two new cars had panels repainted due to actual paint imperfections).

[Tpduke112]

That looks like a rock chip...