# Specialized SL5 Production



## Rugergundog (Apr 2, 2011)

So how long until talk of the SL5 talk starts? Im guessing its already being worked on.......April sneaks or hints pop out?

I use to race 600cc sportbikes. Back in the late 90's early 2000's they were all on a 2 year model cycle.........is Specialized gonna go this route or will they slow it down some?

I figure by the title this thread will have 200 hits within an hour:mad2:


----------



## NealH (May 2, 2004)

Successful companies don't slow up. Look at Apple and their relentless drive to introduce new and improved products. If a company lets off the accelerator, sits back and basks in their profits then its only a matter of time before another company will be eating their lunch.

Specialized appears to be running a two to three year cycle so expect the SL5 Tarmac in the fall of 2013 or 2014 at the latest. I think we will see the SL4 Roubaix next year.


----------



## dcorn (Sep 1, 2011)

Ha, ya got me!


----------



## bernithebiker (Sep 26, 2011)

I reckon they may well pause for breath on this one. They had to integrated cables as it's the trend and everyone's doing it, they have refined their BB once and for all now, and they have stated that they don't want to go lighter for fear of affecting rigidity.

I think we are in diminishing gains territory now. How much can they drop off an SL5? 20g? Rigidity, up another 10%? For all the money on new moulds etc. how many people will swap their SL4 for such a small gain?

I waited 9 years to change my Trek 5900, (1190g down to 900g), and the SL4 is stiffer, but the change is not night and day. I hope to be able to wait another 9 years until my next change.......SL12 anyone?!


----------



## GTR2ebike (Jun 30, 2011)

bernithebiker said:


> I reckon they may well pause for breath on this one. They had to integrated cables as it's the trend and everyone's doing it, they have refined their BB once and for all now, and they have stated that they don't want to go lighter for fear of affecting rigidity.
> 
> I think we are in diminishing gains territory now. How much can they drop off an SL5? 20g? Rigidity, up another 10%? For all the money on new moulds etc. how many people will swap their SL4 for such a small gain?
> 
> I waited 9 years to change my Trek 5900, (1190g down to 900g), and the SL4 is stiffer, but the change is not night and day. I hope to be able to wait another 9 years until my next change.......SL12 anyone?!


How many people will switch their SL3 for 50g and 20%, probably a decent amount. It's also about the people who are in the market for a new bike, if something has been on the market for a while. Then it's no longer "new" and therefore people don't want it.


----------



## RkFast (Dec 11, 2004)

GTR2ebike said:


> How many people will switch their SL3 for 50g and 20%, probably a decent amount. It's also about the people who are in the market for a new bike, if something has been on the market for a while. Then it's no longer "new" and therefore people don't want it.


Not me. 

I have an SL3 and have zero "buyers remorse" becuase I didnt wait for the SL4. Not a bit. Unlike a computer or a car where a new one does make a difference, a good bike is a good bike and is going to ride well technically forever. 

To be fair, Im the same way with MTBs. I have a 2005 Turner Flux with the "outdated" Horst Link rear suspension and to me it rides like a dream and I have zero need to replace it with something new. The most I might do is get a new rear shock to freshen it up a bit becuase its really worn out and already has been rebuilt.


----------



## GTR2ebike (Jun 30, 2011)

RkFast said:


> Not me.
> 
> I have an SL3 and have zero "buyers remorse" becuase I didnt wait for the SL4. Not a bit. Unlike a computer or a car where a new one does make a difference, a good bike is a good bike and is going to ride well technically forever.
> 
> To be fair, Im the same way with MTBs. I have a 2005 Turner Flux with the "outdated" Horst Link rear suspension and to me it rides like a dream and I have zero need to replace it with something new. The most I might do is get a new rear shock to freshen it up a bit becuase its really worn out and already has been rebuilt.


Not everyone will but they don't make new ones because no one buys them.


----------



## RkFast (Dec 11, 2004)

GTR2ebike said:


> Not everyone will but they don't make new ones because no one buys them.


I agree. And Spesh even admitted that their improvents are often solely marketing driven. They could make a bike 1,000% stiffer but if its not significantly lighter, it wont sell. So they will make it 500% stiffer and shave grams so they can move frames. The purist in me hates that, but Specialized IS a business, so I understand it.


----------



## Rugergundog (Apr 2, 2011)

I agree that we are at a point that the returns will continue to get smaller and smaller.

IMHO i suspect that Specialized will make adjustments to the rear seat stays on future models. The changes from the SL3 to the SL4 in this area seem like a quick fix to me. I suspect an attachment point like the Trek or Giant models in the future.

The bike design's are maximized to a point that i also suspect that many of the changes will be more cosmetic to appeal to the buyer over true function. Such is the case with internal cables on the SL4; they look nice but in all honesty are not a needed function.

I wouldn't be shocked if a new blend of carbon or some other building material shows itself soon though. IMHO that will be the next big change. There is currently carbon fiber much lighter than the type used to build bike frames...however its reported to have very little flex and more prone to snapping. When that is resolved in a way that is cost effective we will prob see it used. 

Also carbon brakes, and other hard metal parts.


----------



## dcorn (Sep 1, 2011)

Rugergundog said:


> I wouldn't be shocked if a new blend of carbon or some other building material shows itself soon though. IMHO that will be the next big change. There is currently carbon fiber much lighter than the type used to build bike frames...however its reported to have very little flex and more prone to snapping. When that is resolved in a way that is cost effective we will prob see it used.
> 
> Also carbon brakes, and other hard metal parts.


I think this might be the next step. I've heard Lamborghini is working with MIT or some college to develop a much cheaper production method for carbon fiber to the point where it will be in many more production vehicles for a lower price. I'm not sure if this would transfer over to bikes, but it'd be nice to see carbon frames come down in price so that the average cyclist can afford one. 

Does any company make a dry carbon bike or parts?


----------



## Rugergundog (Apr 2, 2011)

I suspect some form of plastic will be used next. Amazing some of the stuff made out of plastic these days.

But i do agree that the actual benefit of the bike build is prob leveling off. How much faster would Lance be riding a 12lb bike vs a 13lb bike???? Prob none.


----------



## new2rd (Aug 8, 2010)

telepathic shifting is next... simply think about shifting gears and "poof" you are going 26 mph up a 10% grade.


----------



## RkFast (Dec 11, 2004)

Call me a luddite, but I would NEVER run a brake caliper that had even a chance of snapping.


----------



## serious (May 2, 2006)

It is funny is to read that some people go from an S-Works SL3 to SL4 and conclude that the bike is much stiffer. I doubt many riders (especially lighter riders) would notice any difference at that level.

I went from a 2008 S-Works Roubaix frame to the 2011 S-Works Roubaix SL3 frame (warranty replacement) and I doubt that under a blind test I could tell the difference.


----------



## tommyturbo (Jan 24, 2002)

Even Specialized Customer Service reps (at least the one I talked to) will tell you that a machine can tell the difference between a S-Works Tarmac SL3 and the SL4, but most mere mortals can't. He went on to say that even people like Boonen and Cancellara couldn't feel the difference in BB stiffness between the SL2 and SL3.


----------



## krocdoc (Mar 11, 2008)

Speaking from personal experience (owned the S-Works SL2 and now the S-Works SL3) the difference in bottom bracket stiffness and snap is easily felt. Out of saddle acceleration is noticeably stronger. Talking with those on the SL4 now, the feedback has been that the perceived difference is a much more compliant ride without any loss of the SL3 stiffness. Smooth is the word used most often. I'll let you know when my SL4 arrives.


----------



## tommyturbo (Jan 24, 2002)

krocdoc,

FWIW, I was just repeating what a Specialized Customer Service rep told me. He also told me that there was a big improvement jump from the SL2 to the SL3, and a much more subtle jump from the SL3 to SL4 (in his opinion I guess).

Based on my personal experience (over 20,000 miles on the SL, nearly 20,000 miles on the SL2, and just under 100 miles on the SL3, the biggest jump was from the SL to the SL2. I just got my SL3 and I wasn't expecting much other than a new paint scheme. 

I was definitely wrong. The SL3 rides significantly better than the SL2 and that makes it a much better descender, especially on rough pavement. I can't tell if there is a stiffer front end helping that as well. The SL3 is a dramatically smoother bike. I can't tell any difference at all regarding BB stiffness/pedaling efficiency. Then again, I never felt even a hint of flex with the SL2 BB.


----------



## serious (May 2, 2006)

There is one other factor here: comparing old, well ridden bikes with a new bike is simply not ideal. An older bike will have more flex naturally. I went from a new 2008 SL frame to a new 2011 SL3 frame and all other components were the same. I truly got to compare 2 new frames, all else being equal.

I am only 155lbs, so perhaps this is another reason I cannot tell much difference between the 2 frames.


----------



## tommyturbo (Jan 24, 2002)

Serious,

Are you saying that a frame starts to flex more as it accumulates miles? I've never experienced that, and my SL2 felt as good as the day it was new. I agree with you that the only way to compare frames is if the equipment is identical, especially the wheels and tires. I moved everything from my SL2 to my SL3. I weigh 152#, but weight is not the issue. If Cancellara and Boonen can no longer feel differences in BB stiffness with the power they generate, it's not likely that someone with a mere mortal's FTP will either.


----------



## serious (May 2, 2006)

Yeah, I was thinking of normal bikes (alu, steel). For CF bikes nothing changes unless components (bearings) are somehow getting looser, but that is a stretch, so I need to take that back!


----------



## jnbrown (Dec 9, 2009)

Rugergundog said:


> I suspect some form of plastic will be used next. Amazing some of the stuff made out of plastic these days.
> 
> But i do agree that the actual benefit of the bike build is prob leveling off. How much faster would Lance be riding a 12lb bike vs a 13lb bike???? Prob none.


I hate to break this to you, but Lance never rode a Specialized and he is no longer fast.


----------



## tetonrider (Jun 3, 2010)

tommyturbo said:


> Even Specialized Customer Service reps (at least the one I talked to) will tell you that a machine can tell the difference between a S-Works Tarmac SL3 and the SL4, but most mere mortals can't. He went on to say that even people like Boonen and Cancellara couldn't feel the difference in BB stiffness between the SL2 and SL3.


i've ridden the roubaix in SL and SL2 configuration, as well as tarmac SL, SL2, SL3 and now SL4 (and venge).

i know specialized touts the lighter/stiffer aspect of the SL4 vs SL3 (isn't that what sells bikes?), but i had heard the real issue from pro rider feedback was NOT the the SL3 wasn't stiff enough (rear triangle) or didn't have a stiff enough bottom bracket but rather that the SL4's front triangle was too harsh. thus, a primary motivation was to add some vertical compliance to that front triangle, without changing the stiffness in the areas that matter.

dropping a few grams appeals to some, but it also affects the stiffness:weight ratio that many consumers and manufacturers really seem to pay attention to these days.


----------



## tommyturbo (Jan 24, 2002)

I guess it's all a matter of perspective (as well as what wheels and tires you are using). I use tubeless tires at 80-85psi and my SL3 rides like a dream. It is noticeably smoother than my SL2 was, so I'm sure the Sl4 is smoother yet. With my tubeless setup I don't know if it would be significant or not.


----------



## tetonrider (Jun 3, 2010)

tommyturbo said:


> I guess it's all a matter of perspective (as well as what wheels and tires you are using). I use tubeless tires at 80-85psi and my SL3 rides like a dream. It is noticeably smoother than my SL2 was, so I'm sure the Sl4 is smoother yet. With my tubeless setup I don't know if it would be significant or not.


not sure that i said (or implied) that the SL3 did not ride great. however, when doing comparisons one should keep tires & wheel pressure constant. i've ridden all those same bikes with the same tires -- vittoria (open) corsa evo cx.

not saying you haven't done that, but at 80-85psi vertical compliance of the frame is a non-issue. at pressures most folks ride (say 105-110 & up) there's definitely a difference.

worth selling an SL3 to go for an SL4? i dunno. i did...but that's NOT because the SL3 was a slouch. then again, neither was the SL2.


----------



## tommyturbo (Jan 24, 2002)

I have used the same wheels (Campy Eurus Two-way) and tires (S-Works Turbo Tubeless) on both the Sl2 and SL3. I have also tried these wheels and tires on my steel bike in place of the usual DT rims/hubs/GP4000s I use with that bike. The tubeless tires (at 80-85psi) rode significantly better than the DT's (at 90-95psi); it was almost as if I were riding a different bike. There was still a big difference when I tried the tubeless at 90-95psi just for comparison purposes. 

I had used the Eurus wheels with GP4000s tires on the SL2 before I started using the tubeless. The difference was there, but not as noticeable as with the steel bike.

FWIW, I weigh 152#, and I have tried the tubeless at pressures from 70-110psi. At any inflation, they seem to roll better than normal clinchers. They seem to roll the fastest at around 80-85psi, grip incredibly well, and ride very smoothly.

I find that the only drawback to the tubeless system is extra weight. I normally don't like to change to anything that adds weight to my bikes, but in the case of tubeless, for me it has been well worth it. The lower rolling resistance of the tubeless helps to mitigate the extra weight somewhat. 

Whoops, sorry for getting off-topic!


----------



## tetonrider (Jun 3, 2010)

tommyturbo said:


> I have used the same wheels (Campy Eurus Two-way) and tires (S-Works Turbo Tubeless) on both the Sl2 and SL3. I have also tried these wheels and tires on my steel bike in place of the usual DT rims/hubs/GP4000s I use with that bike. The tubeless tires (at 80-85psi) rode significantly better than the DT's (at 90-95psi); it was almost as if I were riding a different bike. There was still a big difference when I tried the tubeless at 90-95psi just for comparison purposes.
> 
> I had used the Eurus wheels with GP4000s tires on the SL2 before I started using the tubeless. The difference was there, but not as noticeable as with the steel bike.
> 
> ...


no worries. i've been a tubeless use for MTB since 2002. i don't find a need for it for road (where i ride), but i can see the value. 

anyway, the point is that at low tire pressures and with tubeless setups, the tires will be masking some of the differences.

tubeless road setups are still a fringe use. most people will not experience the SL3 or SL4 at 80psi.

if specialized made the front triangle more compliant without reducing responsiveness of the frame on the SL4 (they did), then they satisfy a larger group of users who finds the SL3 to have that bit of a harsh edge to it with most common setups (clinchers or tubulars at >100psi).


----------



## tommyturbo (Jan 24, 2002)

I just think it's funny that improved ride quality was one of the major things Specialized touted when they introduced the SL3. Now the SL3 is "too harsh" and we must all have the SL4. 

Actually, I loved my SL2 and thought it rode very well. The SL3 does have a smoother ride than my SL2 did. I would have bought the SL4 if I could have got it with a threaded BB. I didn't want to use the adapters with my Campy Ultra-torque crank.


----------



## tetonrider (Jun 3, 2010)

tommyturbo said:


> I just think it's funny that improved ride quality was one of the major things Specialized touted when they introduced the SL3. Now the SL3 is "too harsh" and we must all have the SL4.
> 
> Actually, I loved my SL2 and thought it rode very well. The SL3 does have a smoother ride than my SL2 did. I would have bought the SL4 if I could have got it with a threaded BB. I didn't want to use the adapters with my Campy Ultra-torque crank.


fair enough...but that request is documented from the pro riders.


----------



## tommyturbo (Jan 24, 2002)

The only place I have seen the need to improve the SL3's front end ride documented is in the Specialized ads and interviews, and in articles using the same lingo as the ads. I'm not saying it's not so, but one of the roles for pro riders is to help sell bikes for their sponsor. To me it seems that a little marketing creativity is always part of things.

Specialized makes awesome bikes, and I certainly don't think they go backwards when they intro a new model. I'm sure every new bike is improved, but I do think the margins are diminishing. The S-Works Tarmac SL3 is a pretty darn good bike.

I was riding my Epic 29er yesterday and I was thinking about how the 29er has been a sales boondoggle for the bike manufacturers. For good reason, as it seems like there wasn't much more room for improvement with the 26" bikes. The 29er is a whole new game, and there are some significant reasons to go out and buy one.

Perhaps there will be some big new developments in road bikes. For some it may be electronic shifting; for others hydraulic disc brakes. It will be interesting to see if any radically new materials will be used to make frames.


----------



## dcorn (Sep 1, 2011)

tommyturbo said:


> The S-Works Tarmac SL3 is a pretty darn good bike.


So if I can get a brand new S-works SL3 frameset for $2500 brand new, is it worth the ~$1000 cost savings over the SL4? 

I'm coming from an aluminum bike, and I thought the Venge had a super supple ride, so I'd say anything carbon will be like riding on a cloud IMO.


----------



## tetonrider (Jun 3, 2010)

dcorn said:


> So if I can get a brand new S-works SL3 frameset for $2500 brand new, is it worth the ~$1000 cost savings over the SL4?
> 
> I'm coming from an aluminum bike, and I thought the Venge had a super supple ride, so I'd say anything carbon will be like riding on a cloud IMO.


we don't know your finances and your value equation. 

if you thought the venge was super supple, you'll probably think the SL3 is mushy!


----------



## jrob1775 (Jan 21, 2010)

Rugergundog said:


> So how long until talk of the SL5 talk starts? Im guessing its already being worked on.......April sneaks or hints pop out?
> 
> I use to race 600cc sportbikes. Back in the late 90's early 2000's they were all on a 2 year model cycle.........is Specialized gonna go this route or will they slow it down some?
> 
> I figure by the title this thread will have 200 hits within an hour:mad2:



You will probably see SL4 in the Roubaix for 2013 and then SL5 in the Tarmac by model year 2014. If the current speculation is true, it will have hydraulic disc brakes. :thumbsup:


----------



## RkFast (Dec 11, 2004)

dcorn said:


> So if I can get a brand new S-works SL3 frameset for $2500 brand new, is it worth the ~$1000 cost savings over the SL4?
> 
> I'm coming from an aluminum bike, and I thought the Venge had a super supple ride, so I'd say anything carbon will be like riding on a cloud IMO.


Well...Im in the middle of a warranty replacement...Im going from an Sworks SL3 to an SL4. 

Put it this way....Im pleased Im getting the "latest and greatest." But if I could have gotten a standard threaded SL3 in my choice of color, I would have snapped it up and not given it a second thought. But I couldnt, so I went with an OSBB SL4. 

Is the SL4 better? Probably. But in as much as Brooklyn Decker is "better" than Kate Beckinsale.


----------



## tetonrider (Jun 3, 2010)

jrob1775 said:


> You will probably see SL4 in the Roubaix for 2013 and then SL5 in the Tarmac by model year 2014. If the current speculation is true, it will have hydraulic disc brakes. :thumbsup:


maybe a lawsuit by volagi will follow? 

assuming the tarmac will remain their top pro race bike (esp for climbers and those who are weight-conscious), i am a little skeptical of the hydraulic brakes.

yes, i now there was a win one a hydraulic-brake equipped 'cross bike, but i think it's a while before we see them at the top level. 

i'll speculate that if we see hydraulic brakes in 2013 / 2014, it will be under a different model name.


----------



## tommyturbo (Jan 24, 2002)

I hope that you have better luck with the OSBB and your new SL4. 

I had to Google Brooklyn Decker to see who she was. IMHO, I do think she is "better" than Kate Beckinsale. That would be an easy choice for me!

Whoops, went back to Google Kate Beckinsale. Not so sure!


----------



## tetonrider (Jun 3, 2010)

RkFast said:


> Well...Im in the middle of a warranty replacement...Im going from an Sworks SL3 to an SL4.
> 
> Put it this way....Im pleased Im getting the "latest and greatest." But if I could have gotten a standard threaded SL3 in my choice of color, I would have snapped it up and not given it a second thought. But I couldnt, so I went with an OSBB SL4.
> 
> Is the SL4 better? Probably. But in as much as Brooklyn Decker is "better" than Kate Beckinsale.


your earlier post confused me. sounded like you were sticking with an SL3 forever...but now you're switching. can specialized NOT supply you with an SL3? 

you could take the SL4 they give you, sell it, and get a new-in-box) SL3 and pocket some cash, if you prefer.

here's the thing: if we extend the example a bit....was the SL2 soooo much better than the SL? was the SL3 sooooo much better than the SL2? is the SL4 sooo much better than the SL3? the answer is -- generally speaking -- that the gains are in small increments; evolution, not revolution, if you will.

however, when we look at the sum of small gains, there can be a big jump (SL->SL4).

does it make sense to go from an SL3 to an SL4? to some, it might. to others, it might not. some people get off on having the latest. for others, that small difference could be meaningful on their rides/races. for others, the cost differential doesn't matter a bit.

it's really about cost:benefit -- intensely personal. rarely is it a no-brainer for someone to take a perfectly functional bike and replace it with something that is marginally better, yet we see this behavior all the time with computers, phones, and anything electronic.


----------



## tetonrider (Jun 3, 2010)

tommyturbo said:


> I hope that you have better luck with the OSBB and your new SL4.


i'm confused--did he have a BB problem with the SL3?

i've been using (and loving) OSBB/BB30/PF30 for 4 years now (multiple bikes) and have had nary a problem. then again, i never had problems with threaded BBs, either.

i like the crank options that BB30 gives me (and the fact that i can pretty much run all cranks with an adapter if need be). not so the other way around.


----------



## StillKeen (Oct 4, 2005)

Definitely the SL5 will be under development now, you can't turn on and off an R&D engine ... the people will leave. Also the lead time to have tools built, first off's made and tested and then build up stock, it takes a lot of time.

I am amazed that no magazine/website has organized a truly blind bike test (okay, I realize that they would have to be careful incase it shows that the 'best' bike is a Bikes Direct). Twenty or thirty frames from different manufacturers, all painted black. Identical components (change stem, bars, saddle to suit testers) and have a decent sized bunch or riders ride each one ... slip a few riders the same bike a second time without telling them to see if the feedback is consistent. 

The marketing machines seem to churn out a lot of hot air about how poor last seasons bike is, and how the new one is the best bike ever made and you can't live without it. Even though they said the exact same thing about the last one.

A local shop was clearing SL2 frames six months ago for about $US1800, and then SL3 for $2200. Really tempting, as that is much lower than the regular price (in my country), but with the marketing hammering on about how the SL4 is such an improvement, I held off. (I want that pointless but beautiful internal cable routing).

What features to add to the SL5? I think they'll make the SL5 frame an electronic only cable routing. By the time mid to late 2013 or early 2014 comes along, 'everyone' buying a SL5 level bike will 'need' electronic shifting. And to lure the SL4 riders to upgrade, I think there'll be an internal frame mounting location for the battery (possibly a specialized aftermarket battery). If trek haven't patented it, then I also expect more companies to have speed and cadence sensors integrated into the frame.


----------



## RkFast (Dec 11, 2004)

tetonrider said:


> your earlier post confused me. sounded like you were sticking with an SL3 forever...but now you're switching. can specialized NOT supply you with an SL3?
> 
> you could take the SL4 they give you, sell it, and get a new-in-box) SL3 and pocket some cash, if you prefer.
> 
> ...


I could not have gotten the SL3 with the specs I wanted, so I went with the newer bike.

Its this simple....the SL4 is improved in some areas, but the SL3 is a great, great frame too and if you opt for it you wont be dissapointed.


----------



## nismo73 (Jul 29, 2009)

Wondering if the SL3 frame mold will make it to the Comp level for the '13 bikes...Spesh seems to be on a two year cycle with their bikes and '12 is the second year of the SL2 frame mold on the lower level Tarmacs.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

StillKeen said:


> Definitely the SL5 will be under development now, you can't turn on and off an R&D engine ... the people will leave. Also the lead time to have tools built, first off's made and tested and then build up stock, it takes a lot of time.
> 
> *I am amazed that no magazine/website has organized a truly blind bike test (okay, I realize that they would have to be careful incase it shows that the 'best' bike is a Bikes Direct). Twenty or thirty frames from different manufacturers, all painted black. Identical components (change stem, bars, saddle to suit testers) and have a decent sized bunch or riders ride each one ... slip a few riders the same bike a second time without telling them to see if the feedback is consistent. *
> 
> ...


Interesting points. Re: the bold statements, back in '96 - the steel SLX, EL-OS, Nivachrom days with similar 'arguments' re: stiffness/ weight as today's - there actually was a test done with some interesting results (link below). Because of both the financial/ legal implications, I doubt you'd see a comparable test today, which is (IMO) to the detriment of the customer.

Continuing with that same mindset, it might be the retro-grouch in me, but I think that (save for the sponsored pro's) for the average recreational rider, minimal stiffness/ weight differences result in a near zero difference in performance. IME 2 lbs. less weight translates into no perceivable performance gains. And since I've experimented with tires/ pressures, I never experienced an overly stiff ride, which is a far cheaper solution than 'upgrading' to the next higher 'SL?' frameset. 

Magnificent 7

In reading the article, it strikes me how much some facets of bike buying have changed, while others (mainly, marketing) have stayed the same.


----------



## ronderman (May 17, 2010)

I've ridden the SL5 - it is lighter and stiffer than the SL4, but also a bit more forgiving as they changed some of the carbon layup and tube shapes.

Come back to this space in some months time and you will see just how right I am.


----------



## RkFast (Dec 11, 2004)

tommyturbo said:


> I hope that you have better luck with the OSBB and your new SL4.
> 
> I had to Google Brooklyn Decker to see who she was. IMHO, I do think she is "better" than Kate Beckinsale. That would be an easy choice for me!
> 
> Whoops, went back to Google Kate Beckinsale. Not so sure!


Thank you! Appreciate it. Its supposed to arrive in a few weeks. I also ordered the updated spacer kit from Spesh that applies some side load to the whole assembly. 

None of this matters anyway. Im selling my Specialized bikes becuase evidently, they drink baby's blood and are plotting to invade Poland or something. At least thats what Im reading.


----------



## Chris-X (Aug 4, 2011)

RkFast said:


> Thank you! Appreciate it. Its supposed to arrive in a few weeks. I also ordered the updated spacer kit from Spesh that applies some side load to the whole assembly.
> 
> None of this matters anyway. Im selling my Specialized bikes becuase evidently, they drink baby's blood and are plotting to invade Poland or something. At least thats what Im reading.


Why don't you buy a Volagi?

Evidently Specialized thinks the bow stay is a great design.:thumbsup:


----------



## RkFast (Dec 11, 2004)

Chris-X said:


> Why don't you buy a Volagi?
> 
> Evidently Specialized thinks the bow stay is a great design.:thumbsup:


I heard they come in Flo-Red.........


----------



## ronderman (May 17, 2010)

PJ352 said:


> Interesting points. Re: the bold statements, back in '96 - the steel SLX, EL-OS, Nivachrom days with similar 'arguments' re: stiffness/ weight as today's - there actually was a test done with some interesting results (link below). Because of both the financial/ legal implications, I doubt you'd see a comparable test today, which is (IMO) to the detriment of the customer.
> 
> 
> Magnificent 7
> ...


That article is great and, jeez, it's hard to think that in 1996 bikes were so 1980 or even 1960s. I had a land shark that was lugged upfront and tig in the back. 

Everyone should read that article, so much better than the ones today. And the Nashbar ad for record front ds for $50!!!


----------



## tetonrider (Jun 3, 2010)

RkFast said:


> Thank you! Appreciate it. Its supposed to arrive in a few weeks. I also ordered the updated spacer kit from Spesh that applies some side load to the whole assembly.
> 
> None of this matters anyway. Im selling my Specialized bikes becuase evidently, they drink baby's blood and are plotting to invade Poland or something. At least thats what Im reading.


are they selling that preload spacer kit separately?

for what it's worth, i've run the standard kit (cone spacer + wave washer on the NDS) in 2 incarnations since 2008 -- no problems.

got a 2012 shiv module and it came with the new style preload adjuster. wound up acquiring another '12 crankset and it came with..... a wave washer.

haven't yet put the preload adjuster through its paces. i was a little surprised the other '12 crankset didn't come with it, but i guess it might have been a running change and maybe the '12 crankset i got was a mid-'11 one. anyway, i'm curious about swapping that out.

let me know if you can order them separately. thanks!

(on an unrelated note...does anyone have a source for "split grommets" (as seen in step 6 of this specialized internal cable routing document: http://service.specialized.com/collateral/ownersguide/new/assets/pdf/Shifters---Shimano-Di2-Internal-Routing-Instruction-Guide.pdf)?

i'm looking for 3-4 of them. thanks! they come with the tarmac and venge (and probably roubaix). i'm also looking for one "closed" one (comes with the tarmac).

Rkfast--are you running di2 or mechanical? if mechanical, would you consider letting me have those 3 grommets that come with the sl4 (2 split, one solid)? they are not needed for mechanical. i can pay you, as appropriate.

thanks!


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

ronderman said:


> I've ridden the SL5 - it is lighter and stiffer than the SL4, but also a bit more forgiving as they changed some of the carbon layup and tube shapes.
> 
> Come back to this space in some months time and you will see just how right I am.


lol haha


----------



## tetonrider (Jun 3, 2010)

aclinjury said:


> lol haha


love it!


----------



## RkFast (Dec 11, 2004)

tetonrider said:


> are they selling that preload spacer kit separately?
> 
> for what it's worth, i've run the standard kit (cone spacer + wave washer on the NDS) in 2 incarnations since 2008 -- no problems.
> 
> ...


Running mechanical...no frame yet though....still waiting. Ill let you know if it comes with them when it shows up.


----------



## tetonrider (Jun 3, 2010)

RkFast said:


> Running mechanical...no frame yet though....still waiting. Ill let you know if it comes with them when it shows up.


thanks!

for what it's worth, mine came with a small box of parts, including a number of cable stops and grommets (& a plug). i needed the grommets for di2, but had i been running mechanical they would not have been needed.

your frame *should* come with all this stuff. with specialized warranty, they generally supply a frame or module, so they wouldn't know what you are running.

will you build it up yourself?


----------

