# Tarmac Pro SL build on a budget



## ukbloke (Sep 1, 2007)

I'm looking for a new road bike, and the Tarmac is at the top of my list. I thought I'd run my thoughts past the community here to see if my plan makes sense. I have a budget, agreed with the financial controller, of around three thousand dollars. There's some wiggle room in the numbers and perhaps something that rounds down to three thousand would be OK, but I'd definitely be in trouble if the first digit was more than a three!

For a pre-built Tarmac I'm looking at an Expert Double and that's already up toward the upper limit on what I can spend. It's a fabulous bike, no doubt, but there are some parts that I might not have chosen given a free choice. So this leads me to the Tarmac Pro SL frameset and building it myself. The up-side is that I get a higher-end frame, presumably a bit lighter and stiffer. I'm pretty shocked by the prices on the 2009 bikes but this frameset seems like more reasonable value to me (especially as it is basically the S-Works frame from last year?).

With my budget I can do this:

Tarmac Pro SL frameset, $1900 (or slightly less)
Full Dura Ace 7800 components, $1050 on close-out now
Ritchey WCS handlebars, about $75 
Ultegra PD-6620 pedals, about $100-120
This places me at about $3000 before any tax and shipping. Fortunately I'm already set on the rest of the build:

Ritchey WCS stem, already have a spare
Saddle, already have a spare
Wheelset - reuse either existing Dura Ace/Mavic Open Pro or Ritchey WCS Protocols for now, and think about getting something better in a year or two
Other small parts, tools, stand, already set up at home

I should mention that I'm not a weight weenie. I'm looking for reliability, durability and value.

I'm thinking of the 61cm frame in white, and that's the same as bpalk's build here. I'm the same height at 6'5" but with longer legs and a cycling inseam close to 38". The scaling of the head-tube with larger sizes is interesting on the Tarmac. At 61cm the head tube ends up close to that of the Roubaix at the same size, and closer to the Madone Performance fit than the Pro fit. This really helps me get a reasonable saddle-to-bar drop considering that there's going to be a lot of seatpost showing. 

One slight problem is finding a large enough Tarmac to test ride. The LBS has a 61cm low-end Roubaix which I can ride. This is somewhat similar in terms of sizing but obviously not the same in terms of ride. They have offered to get a loaner S-Works from Specialized in Morgan Hill for me to try for a weekend. The only downside there is that I might really like it ...

No specific questions, but if anyone has any thoughts or suggestions I'd be happy to hear them. I guess mostly I'm looking for reassurance before I spend all this money.

Cheers!


----------



## pdainsworth (Jun 6, 2004)

Drop the coin, man. The frame is great. I can ride it all day, it's nice and comfortable, plenty stiff, and... well, it's just effin awesome. I have a stock Pro SL SRAM on which I've changed the saddle, stem, and tires. I'm 6'1", 240lbs (down from 280) and ride a 58cm frame. The front end tracks beautifully without being too buzzy. Just a great bike. Enjoy yours.


----------



## Dr_John (Oct 11, 2005)

ukbloke - congrats on the decision to build a new bike. You won't hear any dissent from me since the bike you're putting together is essentially what I'm riding. As you know, I really log the miles on my '08 S-Works SL (almost 7,000 miles), including now at least one century a week. The things steers itself down Hwy 84.  Other than routine maintenance, I haven't done a thing to it but ride it, except change the S-Works seatpost. I couldn't get it to not creak. I tried all the common fixes (cutting, lubing with Tacx carbon prep, different tightening torques, etc) to no avail. Finally replaced it with a Ritchey WCS carbon. IMO, aside from the cassettes, really tough to beat Dura-Ace for reliability, and at the current close-out prices, it's a tremendous value. But you're going with the Dura-Ace standard crank? You're a stronger climber than I am, but I still can't do the longer 15+% grades on a standard crank. OLH, Kings, Hwy 9, Hamilton, sure, but no way for me on Page Mill and the other vomit-inducing steep climbs. Just something to consider. 



> I'm pretty shocked by the prices on the 2009 bikes but this frameset seems like more reasonable value to me (especially as it is basically the S-Works frame from last year?).


Actually it was a mid-year release. At the beginning of '08 they had the S-Works SL and S-Works SL2. They released the Pro SL later in the year and dropped the S-Works SL so there would be only one S-Works Tarmac.

Knowing you and your size and your good understanding of bike fitting/frame geometries, I think you'll really want to test the frame size to make sure it's going to work for you. Sounds like you're dealing with a pretty good shop already, so definitely test the loaner. An alternative may be Mike's Bikes in Palo Alto. Their floor inventory of Specialized road bikes is impressive, and they might have 61 Tarmac on the floor. The Tarmacs are great bikes, and I wouldn't worry about ride quality on a lower model. Just make sure the geometry is going to work for you.

Good luck, and PM me if I can help at all.


----------



## ukbloke (Sep 1, 2007)

Many thanks to pdainsworth and DrJohn for the words of wisdom. I'm working with Calmar Bicycles in Santa Clara. They are less than a mile from where I live, and they've been absolutely fabulous in their advice and willingness to work with me on building up a frame. They have access to both Specialized and Trek so I get side-by-side advice on both bikes that I'm interested in. In fact the Trek frameset is about $1000 more expensive so building up a Madone isn't really an option - it would be the 5.2 Performance bike or nothing.

I doubt that any stock bike is going to fit perfectly for my particular proportions, but there should be enough range of adjustment in saddle and bar positioning to get something dialled in. Even with a custom frame I don't think that I can get optimal values for all the sizing parameters, so I'm looking for a compromise that works. The large Tarmacs look good to me because of the longer head tube sizes and sensible top tube sizes. So I can get the bars where I need them without too much rise in the stem, and with reasonable reach. But I need to try this on a bike rather than on paper. I will check out Mike's Bikes just in case they have a 61cm in stock.

Thanks again!


----------



## wiggerfoo528 (Sep 13, 2008)

dunno if they have it in a 61cm, but I think the specialized allez is pretty close to the same geometry as the tarmac (just an aluminum frame instead). sounds like a great plan though, enjoy the new ride!


----------



## PaulRivers (Sep 11, 2006)

I think it sounds like a great idea! With the price increase in the Expert model, it practically costs the same money to buy the Tarmac SL frame and build it up, and you get a nicer ride to boot.

I have a 2007 Specialized SWorks Tarmac SL. It seems stiffer, but the thing I really noticed is that it *completely* soaks up road buzz. The Expert soaked up a lot of it, but the SL is really smooth.

I believe this years Pro SL is exactly the same geometry as the SL2, just slightly lower grade carbon (Elite is 6r, Expert is 8r, Pro SL is 10r, SL2 is 11r).


----------



## Dr_John (Oct 11, 2005)

It sounds like Calmar has really helped you so far. If they're willing to get an S-Works demo for you for a weekend, I'd definitely do that, and give them your business. It's not like you're going to ride the SL2 and love it and then hate the Pro SL.

The Allez suggestion is good to assess fit, as mentioned, but my impression is that they're becoming pretty hard to find on the floor at Bay Area bikes shops.


----------



## ukbloke (Sep 1, 2007)

Dr_John said:


> It's not like you're going to ride the SL2 and love it and then hate the Pro SL.


I'm more worried that I might ride the SL2 and want one! It turns out that Mike's Bikes does have a 61cm Tarmac Elite, so I can at least go and see the larger frame and take some extra measurements. It all depends on the weather tomorrow morning - if it isn't too rainy I'll be riding up Montevina Rd, otherwise I'm going bike shopping! Thanks for all the advice.


----------



## brentster (Jul 12, 2007)

ukbloke said:


> if it isn't too rainy I'll be riding up Montevina Rd, *otherwise I'm going bike shopping!* Thanks for all the advice.


Watch. He ends up buying a $9,000 S-Works tomorrow.


----------



## Dr_John (Oct 11, 2005)

> Watch. He ends up buying a $9,000 S-Works tomorrow.


 LOL... yeah. :smile5:



> if it isn't too rainy I'll be riding up Montevina Rd


 Supposed to be bad weather tomorrow, so go get your shopping done. I start work December 1st, so get your new bike together before then so you can drop me nicely on a mid-week OLH climb.


----------



## Blade-Runner (Jun 4, 2008)

Shop around for prices on both frames; you'll be surprised what you might be able to get an SL2 frame for.


----------



## PaulRivers (Sep 11, 2006)

ukbloke said:


> I'm more worried that I might ride the SL2 and want one!





paulrivers said:


> I believe this years Pro SL is exactly the same geometry as the SL2, just slightly lower grade carbon (Elite is 6r, Expert is 8r, Pro SL is 10r, SL2 is 11r).


Just a repeat fyi...


----------



## ukbloke (Sep 1, 2007)

> But you're going with the Dura-Ace standard crank? You're a stronger climber than I am, but I still can't do the longer 15+% grades on a standard crank. OLH, Kings, Hwy 9, Hamilton, sure, but no way for me on Page Mill and the other vomit-inducing steep climbs. Just something to consider.


Not sure where you getting this "stronger climber" nonsense. I still can't quite match your time on OLH!  

I've thought long and hard about this, and I'm set on the standard crank, thanks. Currently I ride a triple so I know exactly what the standard gearing feels like with a variety of cassette choices. I'm keeping the old bike and I will continue to use this on the real steeps. I like the idea of having two bikes optimized for different things rather than trying to find a compromise setup. A compact is a reasonable choice, but I don't know how I would get on with the bigger ratio gap between the 2 chain-rings nor do I want to run a big cassette. For the real steeps I happy to use the triple and throw it into the small ring so that I can spin. So for this bike 53-39 by 12-25 is just right for me.

(But if I get it wrong or get weaker with the passing years, I can always get the compact crank later.)



> I start work December 1st, so get your new bike together before then so you can drop me nicely on a mid-week OLH climb.


Maybe I'll drop you on the first third with my unusual pacing, but you'll have me by the top I'm sure! Actually I've been backing off a bit as we approach the off-season and it becomes a lot more fun if every ride isn't run against the clock!


----------



## ukbloke (Sep 1, 2007)

There were no major purchases made today but I had a lot of fun shopping. It wasn't a good day for test rides either with the rain, but I was able to try some bikes indoors with a trainer. The Tarmac frame in 61cm looks huge. This is mostly because of the scaling up of the head tube with the size. With the big down-tube and the long head-tube the front-end of the frame dominates the look of the frame. The top tube and reach fits me slightly better than my current bike, but still felt that it was going to be on the long size. The extra long head tube, with spacers and an angled up stem felt all wrong but obviously that can all be fixed to give the amount of drop that I want. This was all expected.

Then I tried a 58cm 2008 S-Works just to try it for size, and pretty much so that I could rule it out from my thought processes. Much to my surprise the smaller bike may be workable. Sure there's a lot of seat-post showing but the fore/aft positioning was reasonable and reach was better too. Again the stem set-up was all wrong, so it wasn't clear-cut. The knee to bar clearance is the critical factor but I think it will be OK.

I'll be back another time to try both sizes on the road. I'd really like to make the 58 work so that I get a quicker handling, more responsive bike. Tom Boonen is more-or-less my height and I believe he rides the 58.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

ukbloke said:


> I'd really like to make the 58 work so that I get a quicker handling, more responsive bike.


Not a valid reason to go down a size. If you notice, as frame size increases most changes to geo are related to accomodating the riders increased dimensions and maintaining weight distribution, relatively speaking. Geo that affects ride/ handling doesn't appreciably change with larger frame sizes because companies strive to preserve their 'trademark ride'.

For example, when comparing the 58 and 61 cm Expert, two values that change ride/ handling (trail and wheelbase) change by 3 mm's and 1 cm respectively - changes you'd never notice out on the road. But changes that accomodate a riders increased dimensions (TT length, ST length, HT length and standover) are more substantial (but they don't affect ride/ handling).

IMO, get the frame size that, when properly dialed in, gets you closest to your optimal fit. That will be your best handling bike.


----------



## ukbloke (Sep 1, 2007)

PJ352 said:


> IMO, get the frame size that, when properly dialed in, gets you closest to your optimal fit. That will be your best handling bike.


Thanks, that makes a lot of sense. The plan is to get both bike sizes in side-by-side, set them both up based on the my old dialed bike, and go on back-to-back test rides. My heart is telling me the 58 but the brain says 61cm.

I also went to a Trek shop today and had a pretty miserable experience. The Madones looked nice enough, but the salesperson appeared to know less about them than me. He couldn't find a sizing chart for the seat cap thingee to figure out if a 60cm was possible (it is). Oh well.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

ukbloke said:


> Thanks, that makes a lot of sense. The plan is to get both bike sizes in side-by-side, set them both up based on the my old dialed bike, and go on back-to-back test rides. My heart is telling me the 58 but the brain says 61cm.
> 
> I also went to a Trek shop today and had a pretty miserable experience. The Madones looked nice enough, but the salesperson appeared to know less about them than me. He couldn't find a sizing chart for the seat cap thingee to figure out if a 60cm was possible (it is). Oh well.


When possible, back to back test rides are the best way to go because how that last ride felt will be fresh in your mind. Forget the head versus heart thing and go with your gut.  

Regarding bike shops, your experience at the Trek dealer mirrors mine, except around my area it could be just about any brand. I've provided a link that may assist you with your fit questions. I did lots of research on the new Madone before opting for the Tarmac, but they're both good choices. It all depends on the ride/ handling preferences of a given cyclist.

https://trekroad.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/2007/06/05/2008_trek_new_mdaone_seat_height__2.gif


----------



## kronis (Aug 17, 2008)

what would be a typical weight for a built up Tarmac Pro SL...with DA?


----------



## ukbloke (Sep 1, 2007)

My Tarmac Pro SL + DA build will be with a bigger frame and completed with nice but not weight-weenie stuff. I think it will come in around 16 pounds with nice wheels, or 17 pounds with my heavier DA/Mavic Open Pro wheels. This route isn't going to get me to 15 pounds.


----------



## kronis (Aug 17, 2008)

My size is a XS -49cm. I couldnt find a way to weigh the frame, fork. Fitted it with DA except an ultegra front D, deda newton stem and bar. toupe saddle and alex da22 wheelset. still feels heavy. could it be the wheels?


----------



## ukbloke (Sep 1, 2007)

Yes, it's the wheels! You have entry-level wheels on a super-nice frame and build. You can probably save 1 to 2 pounds of weight right there, and closer to 2 if you choose lighter tires/tubes/rim-strips/skewers. Not only do your wheels add weight but they will make the bike feel sluggish when accelerating. I was thinking Easton EA90 SLX wheels for around $500, but I haven't really done much research on that. Wheel choice may also depend on your weight and the quality of the roads that you ride.


----------



## Dr_John (Oct 11, 2005)

My 54 '08 S-Works SL, with full Dura-Ace, Toupe saddle, Zipp SL bar, Ritchey WCS carbon seatpost, Speedplay Ti Zeros, and Shimano WH-7850SL wheels weighs 15.7 lbs with bottle cages.



> alex da22 wheelset. still feels heavy. could it be the wheels?


According to this thread, those wheels are 1900+ g. It'd be quite easy to drop a pound off the bike with a better wheel set.

http://www.bikeradar.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=14824907



> was thinking Easton EA90 SLX wheels for around $500


I considered those too awhile back when I was looking to replace my Ultegra wheels that I cracked. I currently need another set of wheels and (finally) just ordered a Shimano WH-7850 C24 wheel set. Those should be fun.


----------



## kronis (Aug 17, 2008)

Hmm..thanks for the advise. I will work out a lighter wheelset. Haha, will post the pictures when i get it, current one doesn't look very nice!!


----------



## kronis (Aug 17, 2008)

''896g for the front and 1121g for the rear'' WOAH! but it sure is bombproof!


----------



## ukbloke (Sep 1, 2007)

I went for a test ride at lunch time on a Tarmac Pro SL SRAM in a 58cm frame. The sizing was perfect! I have a lot of seatpost showing - about 24cm from top of the seat tube to the rails of the saddle. This is pretty much the same as my hard-tail mountain bike frame. However, reach and clearance of knees with respect to the handlebar were just fine. The stem set-up was all wrong - a 105mm stem at about 20 degrees up with maybe an inch of spacers - however, that can all get dialed in later. I want 2-3cm more drop and slightly more reach.

The bike weighed in at just over 16 pounds including my Ultegra SPD-SL pedals which is a bit more than I would have thought. However, it felt unbelievably light in my hands.

As for the test ride itself, I was very impressed. It's a completely different experience to an aluminum frame that's for sure! I could go on at length about how lovely it was, but the conclusion is that I'm sold on this frame and in this size. In fact, I didn't even want to ride the 61cm after this, there didn't seem to be any point, so I didn't.

The SRAM Red levers were very nice but not particularly good ergonomically for my over-sized hands. I didn't particularly like the handlebar, but I really liked the saddle. I must have put something like 15-20 miles on the bike. I went from Palo Alto out via Page Mill to Arastradero to Alpine, up and down Golden Oak, on Alpine out to Portola Road, down past OLH (and yes, I was very tempted), down Sand Hill, to Santa Cruz/Alpine then Foothill back to Page Mill Road. Frankly, I didn't want to take the bike back at all.

One problem - no framesets available right now in gloss white, they're due in early February. Plenty of availabilty in the carbon/red if that tickles your fancy. I like the white a lot, so I will wait. Hopefully it won't be quite as long as that.


----------



## Dr_John (Oct 11, 2005)

It's really hard to imagine you on a 58. I have a 56 Allez which is a bit too big, but not ridiculously so. But it sounds like it works for you, so that's all that matters. I would have thought a Pro SL with Red would have been lighter too. Oh well.



> One problem - no framesets available right now in gloss white, they're due in early February.


Did Mike's Bikes Palo Alto tell you this? When I ordered my '08 S-Works SL from them in mid-January, I was told I wouldn't get it until March at the earliest, most likely April. I paid for the frameset in full anyways because I knew that's what I wanted and I was employed at the time. I got a call a week and a half later that my frame had arrived. Not saying that would happen with you, and I don't know why I got mine so much sooner than projected, but if you're absolutely sure it's what you want, get it ordered as soon as possible.



> ''896g for the front and 1121g for the rear'' WOAH! but it sure is bombproof!


They better be!  

And woo hoo! My Shimano carbon clinchers arrived today.


----------



## nis240sxt (Oct 6, 2004)

For some reason, the newer tarmacs run a size larger. I bought an 08' SL2 but had to sell it because it was too large for me. I previously rode a 54cm tarmac/roubaix but currently ride an 09' Roubaix Expert in 52cm. It's pretty strange since the geometry has not changed. So I think ukbloke should be ok on his 58CM. Anyways, good luck on the Tarmac Pro. Are you sure you don't want to consider an 09' Roubaix Expert in gloss white? I thought the SL2 was awesome but the 09' Roubaixs are even better unless you do crits


----------



## ukbloke (Sep 1, 2007)

Dr_John said:


> It's really hard to imagine you on a 58. I have a 56 Allez which is a bit too big, but not ridiculously so. But it sounds like it works for you, so that's all that matters.


I was surprised too, and my original concern was whether even the 61cm would be big enough but there was no doubt about its "bigness" from the moment that I saw it. I only tried the 58cm to rule it out. It is a big change coming from a more traditional geometry 62cm bike. There's a lot of seatpost showing and I had to get over that from an aesthetics point of view - now I'm telling myself that I'm maximizing the vertical compliance!

The Tarmac has a 3cm longer head-tube than my old bike. Many of us tall folk have been sizing up our frames so that the saddle-to-bar drop isn't too excessive and that solves the problem for me, and I can probably still have an angled down stem or maybe zero degree. The top tube reduces by 2.3cm and that compensates for the 2cm that I have to jack the saddle forward on the old frame. It really does work.

If I go up to the 61cm, I get another 3cm of head tube which I personally do not need, 3cm extra of seat tube which is nice, but 1.8cm of top tube which puts me back in the same problem as my current bike. I am perhaps in between, and either could work. for me. Despite what's been said earlier, I have a sneaking suspicion (but no evidence) that there is a sweet spot in the handling of a frame in the most popular middle sizes. Particularly I wonder if the outlier frames like the XXL 61cm are so over-sized that something gets compromised.

I realize that I will have to put up with a lot of well-meaning people telling me that I should get a bike that fits. Like the guy at my last century ride insisting that I needed a custom titanium 64cm ...



> Did Mike's Bikes Palo Alto tell you this?


Yes, they did but it came straight off the Specialized stock web-site where they have access to all the central inventory levels. I did wonder if the delay was over-stated to encourage sales of the other color.



> And woo hoo! My Shimano carbon clinchers arrived today.


Those are some super-nice wheels. Have fun with them!


----------



## ukbloke (Sep 1, 2007)

nis240sxt said:


> Are you sure you don't want to consider an 09' Roubaix Expert in gloss white? I thought the SL2 was awesome but the 09' Roubaixs are even better unless you do crits


Those are nice bikes too. I'm leaning toward the Tarmac based on geometry. For the same 58cm frame, the Roubaix gives me 1cm less on seat tube giving another cm of seat-post showing. I also get 2cm more of head tube, which I'd have to factor out with the stem and no spacers. But the defining characteristic is 2.6cm more wheel-base and that is something that I am trying to get away from on my current frame. I also get the 10r carbon on the Tarmac Pro SL frameset but not on the Roubaix equivalent, and the stiffness appeals to me. I'm sure that it is a smoother and more stable ride with the Roubaix and Paris-Roubaix is my favorite of the spring classics, but it is definitely the Tarmac for me. Thanks!


----------



## Dr_John (Oct 11, 2005)

> Yes, they did but it came straight off the Specialized stock web-site where they have access to all the central inventory levels.


I should have mentioned that's where they got the info for me too. I stood right there and watched her pull it up. I guess my point was that in my experience, it's not entirely accurate.


----------



## Dr_John (Oct 11, 2005)

> I'm sure that it is a smoother and more stable ride with the Roubaix and Paris-Roubaix is my favorite of the spring classics, but it is definitely the Tarmac for me.


I love my Roubaix, but my Tarmac puts a bigger smile on my face. Having ridden with ukbloke, he definitely wants the Tarmac. 



> Those are some super-nice wheels. Have fun with them!


And not to thread-jack, but finally broke them out of the box, and, oh my, they're gorgeous, in classic, understated way.


----------



## ukbloke (Sep 1, 2007)

Dr_John said:


> I love my Roubaix, but my Tarmac puts a bigger smile on my face. Having ridden with ukbloke, he definitely wants the Tarmac.


So how many miles on the Roubaix and how many on the Tarmac this year? I have to admit that I was searching for extra gears cycling up Golden Oak with the 53/39 by 11-28 on the Tarmac SRAM. I've spotted that I can get an Ultegra compact crank-set pretty cheaply, so I'm thinking that maybe I would get both crank-sets and swap them over but very occasionally.



> And not to thread-jack, but finally broke them out of the box, and, oh my, they're gorgeous, in classic, understated way.


Are you going to run them tubeless too?


----------



## Dr_John (Oct 11, 2005)

> So how many miles on the Roubaix and how many on the Tarmac this year?


2000 on the Roubaix; 7000 on the Tarmac. I just did another 110-mile ride on the Tarmac yesterday.



> I have to admit that I was searching for extra gears cycling up Golden Oak with the 53/39 by 11-28 on the Tarmac SRAM.


I really don't think I could do Golden Oak, Ramona/Los Trancos, etc (i.e., anything 16+%) on a standard crank, even with a 27. I'm just not strong enough. The one thing I do really like at least conceptually about the Specialized S-Works crank on the modules is you don't need a compact and standard crank. You just swap the spider/chain-rings. But you don't really want an SL2 



> I'm thinking that maybe I would get both crank-sets and swap them over but very occasionally.


I don't do that, but I believe PaleAleYum here said he does that. He mostly rides on a Dura Ace crank but switches to a compact for the various Sierra centuries.



> Are you going to run them tubeless too?


I was waiting for Shimano to release the tubeless version of the wheel (WH-7900 C24?) but gave up waiting. It doesn't look like they'll work tubeless. But imagine my Roubaix with the 7850 SL's. That thing will ride like a Cadillac.


----------



## ukbloke (Sep 1, 2007)

I pulled the trigger today. I should have the frame early December, if not before.  I also ordered the components. It sounds like the close-out DA7800 group sets are selling out fast.


----------



## ukbloke (Sep 1, 2007)

*Pictures!*

Here are pictures of my new bike in the garage and also in its natural habitat.


----------



## pdainsworth (Jun 6, 2004)

Congrats, man. I hope you enjoy yours as much as I do mine!


----------



## Dr_John (Oct 11, 2005)

Glad to see you finally got it and got it together. And a suitable "in the wild" pose. :thumbsup: 

So how are you liking the 7850SL's/tubeless?


----------



## ukbloke (Sep 1, 2007)

Dr_John said:


> Glad to see you finally got it and got it together. And a suitable "in the wild" pose. :thumbsup:


It was almost ready for last weekend, it just needed a final tune-up. The picture was taken Thursday lunch-time on the first "installation" ride. Everything works flawlessly. It is at the bottom of a favourite hill climb - you can probably guess which one!



> So how are you liking the 7850SL's/tubeless?


So far, so good! It is hard to distinguish frame effects versus wheel effects after just one ride. They certainly spin up fast and seem great for climbing and descending. The smoothness of the carbon frame and tubeless wheels is a massive change from my old aluminium bike! The rear wheel was breaking traction under high torque on steep climbs, but that was largely due to the leaves and damp conditions after all the rain this week. I'm really looking forward to getting out again in sunny/dry conditions.

I'll write some more on the build and my first impressions of the bike when I get some more time.


----------



## Dr_John (Oct 11, 2005)

> It is at the bottom of a favourite hill climb - you can probably guess which one!


Yep. Recognize the bridge and sign... hence why I said that. 



> The rear wheel was breaking traction under high torque on steep climbs, but that was largely due to the leaves and damp conditions after all the rain this week.


 I almost fell at the top of OLH last week due to that. Where the cracks have been filled with that rubberized-like stuff offers absolutely no traction, and the rain/hail conditions I was riding in made it particularly bad.


----------



## hrstrat57 (Mar 16, 2008)

Outstanding, the leftover wheelset looks real good too!

I just love white frames, got my eyes on a 2009 Roubaix expert....


----------



## pdainsworth (Jun 6, 2004)

It's funny that even though I haven't climbed OLH in 13+ years, I recognized it as well. Does Heiden still live up there?


----------



## ukbloke (Sep 1, 2007)

hrstrat57 said:


> Outstanding, the leftover wheelset looks real good too!


OK, I have to 'fess up. These are hardly the leftover wheelset. The bike build itself did come in as planned at around the projected $3000 (actually two bucks over!). However, at the last moment I caved and ordered some new wheels, making use of Thanksgiving special pricing. My Ritchey WCS Protocols are still in the shop, and I'm wondering if they'll ever get fixed under the warranty. So I thought about the Easton EA90 SLX for a while, but ultimately went with the 7850SL wheelset and the tubeless setup. So far I couldn't be happier with my choice! Of course, the budget suffered somewhat.


----------



## Dr_John (Oct 11, 2005)

I think I mentioned I considered the EA90 SLX too but also went with the 7850-SL's. 7000+ miles on mine and couldn't be happier.


----------



## Dr_John (Oct 11, 2005)

> Does Heiden still live up there?


I believe he's now practicing in Utah.


----------



## hrstrat57 (Mar 16, 2008)

ukbloke said:


> OK, I have to 'fess up. These are hardly the leftover wheelset. The bike build itself did come in as planned at around the projected $3000 (actually two bucks over!). However, at the last moment I caved and ordered some new wheels, making use of Thanksgiving special pricing. My Ritchey WCS Protocols are still in the shop, and I'm wondering if they'll ever get fixed under the warranty. So I thought about the Easton EA90 SLX for a while, but ultimately went with the 7850SL wheelset and the tubeless setup. So far I couldn't be happier with my choice! Of course, the budget suffered somewhat.


Ha!

(still gorgeous, enjoy!!)


----------



## ukbloke (Sep 1, 2007)

*The Build*

I thought I'd write some words on the build for the new bike.

Firstly, the parts acquisition was pretty straightforward. The frame was ordered from the bike store and took a month to arrive. Everything else was ordered over the internet. Initially I went with a full 8 piece Dura Ace groupset from an online Shimano authorized vendor with the best price. However, it turned out that they didn't have much of it in stock and they were putting together the order incrementally sourcing it piece by piece from other distributers. After several weeks waiting for it to come together and several missed ship dates, I lost patience and looked for another source.

It turned out that ordering the items a la carte from PBK in the UK was much cheaper. They had everything I needed in stock apart from the cranks, and then I decided to switch to compact cranks anyway, prompted by Dr John, and went with the Ultegra ones. I was also able to get the DA pedals from PBK for about the same price as the Ultegra ones in the US. I got everything in about 7 days including Thanksgiving. The bulk of the order got held up in customs in the US, but no duty was charged (which was correct according to the duty schedule).

The build itself was very straightforward. I'd pretty much done everything before on one bike or another, but this was the first time to assemble a whole bike. It was quite therapeutic actually putting it altogether, getting every bolt properly greased and torqued to spec. I probably spent a happy couple of hours over four nights doing everything just right. A bike mechanic would probably do the whole thing in a couple of hours.

I had the steerer tube initially cut to the maximum recommended size at the LBS, giving me 4cm of spacers. I started off with the stem flipped up to get the cable lengths over-sized. I'll then work down towards my preferred setting before finalizing the steerer tube and cable lengths. I think I'm going to end up choosing less drop than my previous bike.

The one faux pas was with the front derailleur. No matter what I tried I could not get enough tension to get a good shift into the big chain ring. The front shifting was marginal and seemed to get worse every time I adjusted it. After a lot of head-scratching I found the problem. I was using a braze-on mount (for the first time), and I'd screwed up the attachment. There's a custom washer and I'd installed it between the derailleur and the mount. It needed to go between the mount and the bolt-head. This mistake threw the derailleur position off by a few mm, but also made it pivot under tension. It seemed completely obvious once I knew the solution. I imagine I'm not the first to do this. After fixing the problem the shifting was fine.

Everything else assembled just fine, though I found the cable adjusters on the down tube pretty stiff to use. They don't get much use anyway, but will hopefully free up with some lube and time.

I found that the tubeless tires pretty easy to mount and get inflated with a floor pump. However, they lost pressure overnight so I tried again this time using soap and water to get a good seal. I used an artist's paint brush (don't tell the artist!) and that worked pretty well. They seem to hold pressure OK now, though the rear has started to lose air over the course of a few days. I think I'll try reseating it again. So far I haven't put in any sealant though I'll probably do this later.

As for weight, the bike has come in just under 17 pounds including pedals, bottle cages and computer. I didn't got with the lightest component set or wheels so I am content with this. It is, however, about half-a-pound more than I'd been projecting when spec'ing out the build. Most of the overage is actually in the frame itself. It came in heavier than I had thought, partly because I didn't consider that the white paint finish would add some weight. It'll come down (marginally) when I swap out the saddle, cut the steerer and finish cutting the cables/housings. In the mean-time I'm 5 pounds lighter, and it sure is a lot cheaper to take a pound off the body rather than off the bike!


----------



## Dr_John (Oct 11, 2005)

I just noticed you're using the right STI for the front brake. Have you always ridden like that?

Regarding the weight, you can drop 1/2 a pound by swapping out that 400-gram Performance saddle.  



> In the mean-time I'm 5 pounds lighter, and it sure is a lot cheaper to take a pound off the body rather than off the bike!


 :yikes: So do you have _any_ body fat now? For fun I was working on getting my Roubaix under 16.5 lbs, but I've gained a couple of pounds while R & R'ing, so I'll work on that first.  I'm seriously considering replacing the front noodles...I mean fork.

Regarding the tubeless/air loss: I've found that that will vary from tire to tire, depending on the quality of the bead. My last few have been great and lose air slower than coventional clinchers.


----------



## ukbloke (Sep 1, 2007)

Dr_John said:


> I just noticed you're using the right STI for the front brake. Have you always ridden like that?


Yup, that's how we set them up in the UK, and it is the same on a motorbike. I like it because I can use my better hand to control the more important brake. It typically isn't quite so nice for cable routing though.



Dr_John said:


> Regarding the weight, you can drop 1/2 a pound by swapping out that 400-gram Performance saddle.


It's 225g, much the same as a Selle Italia SLR. I'm thinking of getting a Carbonio Flow, but I'm nervous about the carbon rails.



Dr_John said:


> :yikes: So do you have _any_ body fat now?


An average of 6% according to my wife's scales!


----------



## Dr_John (Oct 11, 2005)

> It's 225g, much the same as a Selle Italia SLR. I'm thinking of getting a Carbonio Flow, but I'm nervous about the carbon rail


The "gel" SLR's weigh that much, but the non-gel's are less than 150 g. I strongly dislike 'gel' saddles. And I'll save you the money - you won't be able to use a Sella Italia carbon rail saddle with that seatpost due to the shape of the rails. The SLR with titanium rails will work fine. I'm really not too picky about saddles, but I really need a 'flow'-type, so my only choice for a non-gel, flow SLR was the Carbonio Flow. I have one on my Roubaix and just ordered another for my Tarmac. My Allez Sport got the S-Works Pave SL seatpost from my Tarmac (creaky, creaky), which works fine with the Toupe saddles. Since my Allez gets all the take-offs/parts I don't like, it's got to be the most pimped out Allez Sport on the planet.


----------



## ukbloke (Sep 1, 2007)

Dr_John said:


> The "gel" SLR's weigh that much, but the non-gel's are less than 150 g. I strongly dislike 'gel' saddles. And I'll save you the money - you won't be able to use a Sella Italia carbon rail saddle with that seatpost due to the shape of the rails. The SLR with titanium rails will work fine. I'm really not too picky about saddles, but I really need a 'flow'-type, so my only choice for a non-gel, flow SLR was the Carbonio Flow.


Yes, I did mean the gel version, because like you I'm looking for a "flow" saddle. I don't like the gel either but it is so thin in these models I think it won't really matter. In fact I bought and returned two Selle Italia SLR Gel Flow saddles because the left and right hand sides of the saddle were off in a height by a good few mm. That's when I went with the Forte saddle as it is much the same shape and weight, and about a quarter of the price.

Thanks for the tip on the rail incompatibility - that will save me a lot of time and hassle! I can't believe that with the huge range of SLR models that Selle Italia has, that there isn't one non-gel flow saddle that I can use! So far I'm happy with the Specialized seat-post (no creaks and no slipping) so that will stay.


----------



## ukbloke (Sep 1, 2007)

*The Ride*

Here's my belated thoughts on the first ride with my new Tarmac. It was a 35 mile loop over very familiar ground, including a timed 3.3 mile climb at 7.5%. I've probably done this loop 20 times over the last year. My previous bike is probably 4 pounds heavier, and an aluminum frame with carbon fork/stays and Ultegra triple components. Unfortunately the weather was pretty miserable - cold, windy and still damp from the rain on the previous day - but this was my last chance to ride in 2008.

My first impression with the Tarmac was one of lightness and responsiveness. The wheels do spin up really fast. I also found that I had to be much more controlled while putting down the power to avoid throwing the front-end of the bike all over the road. The smoothness was just amazing. On my previous bike I could feel all the texture of the road, even good roads. Every grain of the road surface was transmitted through the frame direct to my spine. Now, almost all of that is gone though there's no loss in feel or control. Some of this is the carbon frame, and some is the tubeless setup, but so far I can't apportion the effect. I was riding at 100psi and I will probably go slightly lower when I gather more confidence in the tubeless setup. I'll also try swapping in different wheels at some point to see how much of the smooth ride quality is from the frame or from the wheels.

The build felt very solid and inspired confidence. There were no missed shifts, no creaks or out-of-place noises at all. The Dura Ace front shifting was just amazing, and much better than the Red on the test bike that I'd tried. The trim adjustment was slightly out but I've fixed that now. The rear shifting was completely seamless. I did notice the lack of top-end gearing on a couple of downhills but it is effectively only a mph or two before I run out of spin. I also didn't particularly notice the larger gearing jump between the two chain-rings. It is of course second nature to adjust the rear derailleur as required. So compact does seem like a completely reasonable compromise for me. I was impressed and happy with my component choices.

On to the climb, and the start felt great. Despite trying to keep a balanced pace, I set a blazing record for the first third. The bike felt really stiff and uber efficient. As I started to tire later in the climb I found myself searching for the lower gears. On my old bike I ride this hill with a lowest gear of 39 by 25, and sometimes in 39 by 23. I would only allow myself to use the middle ring on this climb, and consider the little ring to be a capitulation to the hill. However, with the Tarmac's compact set-up and a big 12-27 cassette (geared up for the steepest hills I might face), I had lots more lower gears readily available with a flick of my right finger. So I lost momentum and time on a couple of the slightly steeper parts. It will take more self control to stop myself from using anything more that the 21 cog. In the end I was 30 seconds off a personal best. A good part of this was due to the cold, wind and slipperiness that day as well as getting used to the bike. The weight saving alone should save me 20-30 seconds off my personal best given an equal effort. I'll be back.

The most revealing part of the ride was the downhill leg. My old bike has a longer wheelbase and likes to go fast downhill in straight lines. But it does not like to turn nor to lean, and needs a lot of body english simply to get it through the corners. The Tarmac was a revelation. It simply goes where I point it. I can corner much harder and approach the "on-rails" feeling. I can make steering corrections without any drama. It feels like the bike is a lot more capable downhill than I am, which gives me a lot more confidence.


----------



## ukbloke (Sep 1, 2007)

Dr_John said:


> And I'll save you the money - you won't be able to use a Sella Italia carbon rail saddle with that seatpost due to the shape of the rails. The SLR with titanium rails will work fine.


Dr John - is the problem specifically the ovalized rails versus the horizontal clamp as described and pictured here? It appears that the ovalized titanium rails can be a problem too. Thanks!


----------



## Dr_John (Oct 11, 2005)

> So far I'm happy with the Specialized seat-post (no creaks and no slipping) so that will stay.


I'm reasonably sure the problem with my Pave SL seatpost was a problem with the finish. As I dialed in my seat height I marked the location with electrical tape. A pretty common technique. When I pulled the tape off after an adjustment it pulled off the clear coat too. What the? I pulled the post out and a lot of the finish on the post down in the seat tube had flaked off too. Needless to say, I wasn't impressed with the quality of their top of the line seat post.


----------



## Dr_John (Oct 11, 2005)

> Dr John - is the problem specifically the ovalized rails versus the horizontal clamp as described and pictured here? It appears that the ovalized titanium rails can be a problem too. Thanks!


Egads.... that doesn't look good either. The problem with the carbon rails for me and the Pave SL seatpost was that they're not even very oval. It was immediately clear sitting in the Pave SL head that carbon rails definitely weren't going to work - bad clamping angle => snap, so I didn't even bother. I seem to recall it looking similar to the photos Tschai posted.


----------



## tom_h (May 6, 2008)

ukbloke said:


> Here are pictures of my new bike in the garage and also in its natural habitat.


Great looking bike & build-up :thumbsup: 

May I ask which bottle cages you selected?

BTW, I noted you have clamped the carbon seatpost in a Park stand ... I was under the impression that shouldn't be done (?), risk of post damage ... quite a large clockwise torque. 

Of course, the bike's carbon seat tube shouldn't be clamped either, for similar reason. The Tarmac's curved top-tube might make clamping to that a bit tricky, although at least in that position very little clamp force is needed, as the bike can just hang freely under it's own weight, without any significant torques applied to the frame or post. 

Also many thanks for replying to my other "_Pro SL vs S-Works SL2 Frame Weight_" post ... I am hoping another Pro SL owner replies, so I can estimate the Pro SL's "typical" or average frame weight.


----------



## ukbloke (Sep 1, 2007)

tom_h said:


> Great looking bike & build-up :thumbsup:


Thanks, much appreciated!



> May I ask which bottle cages you selected?


These are Forte theta cages from Performance. They are often on sale for $25 each, and there's a 10% code pretty much all the time, and sometimes 15% or 20%, plus the member discount. They do the job just fine if you don't mind the brand. I'm somewhat tempted to get some S-Works stickers for them!



> BTW, I noted you have clamped the carbon seatpost in a Park stand ... I was under the impression that shouldn't be done (?), risk of post damage ... quite a large clockwise torque.


This is what the bike store does too. I'd rather risk breaking a post than the frame. I was particularly careful to apply counter-pressure when torquing up the bottom bracket cups and pedals.



> Of course, the bike's carbon seat tube shouldn't be clamped either, for similar reason. The Tarmac's curved top-tube might make clamping to that a bit tricky, although at least in that position very little clamp force is needed, as the bike can just hang freely under it's own weight, without any significant torques applied to the frame or post.


The top tube is elliptical in cross-section too, so that's not a good place to clamp either. I used to keep my aluminum bike in the stand while not being used, but I won't be doing that with the carbon frame!



> Also many thanks for replying to my other "_Pro SL vs S-Works SL2 Frame Weight_" post


You're welcome! I remember you from the thread about big-ticket imports too.


----------



## Dr_John (Oct 11, 2005)

Not that it matters at all, but apparently Boonen, who is also 6' 4", was riding a 58 Tarmac SL in 2007:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/photos/2007/tech/probikes/?id=quickstep_specialized_boonen/Boonen1682


----------



## ukbloke (Sep 1, 2007)

Nice find! I believe he has the team fit. I read an article somewhere about his back troubles and the lengths that Specialized went to fit him. He weighs 20 pounds more than me! I'll never be a sprinter or a hard man for the cobbles ...


----------



## tom_h (May 6, 2008)

Dr_John said:


> Not that it matters at all, but apparently Boonen, who is also 6' 4", was riding a 58 Tarmac SL in 2007:


 That stem looks as if it's >15cm long!

Why do the Pros often ride frames that seem to be 1 size too small?
Weight? Stiffness? Shorter wheelbase for maneuverability?


----------



## jhamlin38 (Oct 29, 2005)

I believe they prefer a far greater drop, and adding slapping a longer stem on a shorter frame allows the desired position.


----------



## ukbloke (Sep 1, 2007)

jhamlin38 said:


> I believe they prefer a far greater drop, and adding slapping a longer stem on a shorter frame allows the desired position.


That makes sense. Compared to my setup, he has 35mm less head-tube, 40mm less spacers, and then there's that ~73 degree horizonal stem compared to my 84 degree stem. Adding this up, I'd say his handlebars are 90mm closer to the ground than mine! I do have more seat-post showing though as I'm more leggy, and I haven't finished my fit yet (need to remove some spacers and get a 120mm stem) so the real difference in drop is probably more like 7cm but that's still huge.


----------



## tom_h (May 6, 2008)

Most amateur 6'4" cyclists would probably have opted for the standard geometry 61cm frame (230 mm Head Tube).

The smaller 58cm std frame has a 205 mm HT -- 1 inch more drop between saddle & handlebars.

And the 58cm "team" geometry has just a 170 mm HT -- a full 60mm (2.4 inches) more drop ! 

For the young Pros who have adapted to these drops, I guess it makes a huge difference in reducing aero drag.


----------



## ukbloke (Sep 1, 2007)

Agreed. I'm near the upper limit of the 58cm standard geometry in terms of seat-tube, but it turns out that the top-tube and head-tube are almost ideal for me. I can get the handle-bars exactly where I want them now, and have a variety of lower and higher options should my flexibility change in the future. 

For the insanely tall rider requiring less drop there's even a 64cm Roubaix offering with a 260mm head-tube! This has a huge wheel base of 1053mm too!


----------



## smw (Mar 7, 2006)

Very nice build.

I just got mine done a week ago. I went with the 61 and Im 6'3. I have 3.5in of drop as it is. The feel of the bike as you described is the same I got when riding the Pro Sl. I dont know about noticing the tubulars at all. I am riding a rough feeling set up and the frame made is all feel great. I also ride a Tarmac Expert(08) and love the bike. but compared to the Pro Sl the expert beats me up(although it really doesnt). It is a bit heavier then one would expect (compared to many other lines), Then again being 6'3 and 185 lbs a 16lb bike is no big deal(with the race wheels). Have not ridden it enough yet to compare climbing and descending characteristics. My assumption based on the glues to the road feel is that both will be great.


----------



## ukbloke (Sep 1, 2007)

smw said:


> I just got mine done a week ago. I went with the 61 and Im 6'3. I have 3.5in of drop as it is.


Awesome, I'm sure you will have a lot of happy miles on your new bike!

The main reason I went with the smaller frame was to reduce the top tube length and avoid being too stretched out. Out of curiosity what is your stem set-up like? Mine is 130mm stem, 84 degrees (ie. flipped down) and 30mm of spacers. My drop is a bit more than yours - I'd guess 11-12cm or about 4.5 inches.

I'm thinking of changing to a 120mm stem to reduce reach a tad. I could also flip the stem up and get rid of all the spacers which will keep the bars in almost the same position (within 2-3mm), though I'm tempted not to do this to keep more options open for the future.


----------



## smw (Mar 7, 2006)

ukbloke said:


> Awesome, I'm sure you will have a lot of happy miles on your new bike!
> 
> The main reason I went with the smaller frame was to reduce the top tube length and avoid being too stretched out. Out of curiosity what is your stem set-up like? Mine is 130mm stem, 84 degrees (ie. flipped down) and 30mm of spacers. My drop is a bit more than yours - I'd guess 11-12cm or about 4.5 inches.
> 
> I'm thinking of changing to a 120mm stem to reduce reach a tad. I could also flip the stem up and get rid of all the spacers which will keep the bars in almost the same position (within 2-3mm), though I'm tempted not to do this to keep more options open for the future.



Stem is currently 110mm, but will be changed to a 120mm. The stem is the stock spec. stem in the flipped down mode(which makes it parallel to ground). My drop might be a tad more(Im guessing) but it seems to be good for me right now. Yeah the bike has an amazing ride. I bought it as my race bike, but after the one ride I did on it I thought it rode too nice to not use on longer rides as well.


----------



## ukbloke (Sep 1, 2007)

smw said:


> Yeah the bike has an amazing ride. I bought it as my race bike, but after the one ride I did on it I thought it rode too nice to not use on longer rides as well.


Right, I have another bike which I originally thought I would use for the really steep stuff since it is set up as a triple. But then I decided that I'd never choose to ride that instead of the Tarmac, so the spare bike has been relegated to commuting, roller duties and towing the kiddy trailer!

I see from your other posts that you are in the Bay Area too, and ride OLH and Highway 9 like me! Maybe we'll see each other out there on the road some day, or at an RBR group ride.


----------

