# giant composite vs advanced



## steel515

People here said the advanced was stiffer in the front end and bottom bracket where they felt flex, does this mean Composite is not stiff enough? Is Composite bad choice compared to other steel/carbon?


----------



## botto

while i'm 98% sure i'd take an advanced over my tcr comp, i can ONLY speak for the tcr comp.

i've had my bike since the end of april, and over the past +/-5000 miles I've NEVER experienced any significant flex, whether that's the fork or the BB.

it's plenty stiff, and IMO those who say it's not have 1.weight issues, 2.cheap wheels, 3.badly adjusted headsets.


----------



## sbindra

Both bikes are great. I rode a TCR Comp for 10,000 miles and have about 4,000 miles on my Advanced. The Advanced is definitely stiffer in the bottom bracket. I must admit that I only notice it when I am climbing out of the saddle or sprinting hard. Part of it depends on what you will be using the bike for. For anything except for flat out sprints in a race, the TCR Comp is more than stiff enough for anything that you will use the bike for. I must admit that one of the nicest thing about the Advanced is that while it is stiffer than the TCR Comp, it is just as comfortable.


----------



## rcnute

I respectfully disagree with botto. I had two TCR Comps. Both were flexy in front.


----------



## botto

rcnute said:


> I respectfully disagree with botto. I had two TCR Comps. Both were flexy in front.


how much do you weigh? 
what kind of wheels do you have? 
how long have you been riding? 
what kind of riding do you do?


----------



## steel515

I am wondering I have a steel columbus slx frame, is Giant composite more flexible?


----------



## rcnute

botto said:


> how much do you weigh?
> what kind of wheels do you have?
> how long have you been riding?
> what kind of riding do you do?


At the time, 160.

Ksyrium Elites and Open Pros.

Four years.

Fast recreational.

Your turn.


----------



## botto

rcnute said:


> At the time, 160.
> 
> Ksyrium Elites and Open Pros.
> 
> Four years.
> 
> Fast recreational.
> 
> Your turn.


160

ksyrium sl's

+/-15 years

fast/racing

i've raced mine, i've used it for gan fondos, i've taken it on pretty much every terrain you can take a road bike, and no issues with flex.

btw - my tcr comp is an '05 (size M) fwiw

i guess ymmv


----------



## botto

steel515 said:


> I am wondering I have a steel columbus slx frame, is Giant composite more flexible?


don't know. only had a colomubus SL bike.


----------



## steel515

how does the giant composite compare to a columbus sl bike? Is it stiffer, or less stiff in the front or back I am wondering.


----------



## botto

steel515 said:


> how does the giant composite compare to a columbus sl bike? Is it stiffer, or less stiff in the front or back I am wondering.


to be honest, it's been awhile since i've pedaled my pinarello treviso 'in anger' so i can;t make any real comparisons.

fwiw my giant is about 5-6 lbs lighter, which is handy when there's some climbing to do.


----------



## steel515

no i mean how is the handling of the pinarello columbus sl vs the giant composite, are they similar


----------



## botto

steel515 said:


> no i mean how is the handling of the pinarello columbus sl vs the giant composite, are they similar





botto said:


> to be honest, it's been awhile since i've pedaled my pinarello treviso 'in anger' so i can't make any real comparisons.



.....


----------



## LCFrecrider

*tcr flex...*

I have a 2005 tcr c1. I only noticed a little flex in the front end, but this seemed due to the headset loosing a bit. I recently switched from the Kysiurum Elites to SL3s and noticed that the SL3s were much stiffer. I can now notice a little BB flex when I am out of the saddle climbing very hard. My bike is a med. and I am 160#.


----------



## jwindhall

let's not forget there is a whole line if TCR composites and they are speced with different forks, are they not?

TCR comp, TCR 1, TCR 2, TCR3, TCR limited.


----------



## LCFrecrider

mine is a tcr c1



jwindhall said:


> let's not forget there is a whole line if TCR composites and they are speced with different forks, are they not?
> 
> TCR comp, TCR 1, TCR 2, TCR3, TCR limited.


----------



## Clevor

steel515 said:


> People here said the advanced was stiffer in the front end and bottom bracket where they felt flex, does this mean Composite is not stiff enough? Is Composite bad choice compared to other steel/carbon?


You need to keep prices in mind as the comparison is not a fair one. When I bought my TCR Comp 1 in 2005, I paid $2250 which was a princely sum to me at the time (for a road bike anyway). No way I would dish out $5K for an Advanced or Comp 0. I mean for that price you could get a Colnago C50 frame, anyway, if you are into high snoot Italia stuff.

Some say the C1 fork is flexy, well what do you expect for an OEM fork that weighs around 351 gms! They say the C50 has a stiff fork but what do you expect when mine weighs 422 gms, and I got one of the lighter ones I've ever seen.

I'd also like to chime in here that while the BB is not the stiffest on the TCR Comp 1 these days, it is way beefier than my C50 with it's dated lugged frame. In fact, last time I was in an LBS I compared all the BBs on different bikes and the Giant is beefed up better than the Looks, Times, C50s, and Wiliers. Only the Scott and Cervelo are beefier.

And if you read Giant's web site, they said they can build a much stiffer bike, but it won't be comfortable for a majority of non-pro riders out there. The Giant composite frames are a great compromise of weight, stiffness, and aerodynamics and are very reasonably priced.


----------



## ewitz

I just switched from the TCR Composite 0 (medium) to the Look 585 (medium). 

This was my third Giant TCR in a row, the prior two were both TCR 1 Alloy. I have been road riding for the last 20 years and racing seriously for the last five. Average about 10 000 km/year and I weigh 165. I loved the frame more than any I had previously ridden and can attest to its durability and raceworthiness. But after transfering all of my parts and riding the Look it was a revelation. It puts the stiffness of the TCR Composite into perspective. The TCR is a light and comfortable frame, but stiff, not so much. There is a fair amount of BB and front end flex. And as far as saying "what do you expect for an OEM fork that weighs around 351 gms!" I guess I expect more. The Look has an OEM fork that weighs 295 gms and is a lot stiffer.

That being said I am in the market for a new groupset so that I can build the TCR back up. Will it be my go to bike? Only if it's raining. But it will be ridden and probably raced in critriums.


----------



## botto

want stiff? get one of these


----------



## Clevor

ewitz said:


> I just switched from the TCR Composite 0 (medium) to the Look 585 (medium).
> 
> And as far as saying "what do you expect for an OEM fork that weighs around 351 gms!" I guess I expect more. The Look has an OEM fork that weighs 295 gms and is a lot stiffer.


Again, you're comparing apples to oranges. If you tried to compare a Giant to a Colnago, you would be laughed off their forum. But at the time I considered my Giant, the Look 585 was their highest end frame and priced comparable to the exalted C50.

Comparing a TCR Comp 0 to a Look 585, the Comp O is just a Comp 1 frame with high end components. The frame is the same as a TCR Comp 1 I believe. Compare prices on a Look 585 frame to a TCR Comp 1: $1250 for the Giant and something like $4000 average on the Look (the last time I looked anyway, as there was no Look 685 or whatever). 

The Look 585 might compare favorably to the 'ole' 2005 Advance frame, which was sub 1 kg, used higher modulus carbon fiber, and was no doubt stiffer than the TCR Comp 1 frames in the BB and fork. Who knows how stiff the current Giant frames are if you have a $4000 budget (see Botto); haven't been keeping up lately.

From what I've heard about a Look 585, no doubt ride qualities are different than a Giant, due to geometry and all.


----------



## Janstheman

*Adavanced is the way*

I am a 190lb rider that is very aggresive and hard on my equipment. I upgraded from a T-700 Giant TCR team to an Advanced in 2005 and have never looked back. I built up my Advanced frame the night I got it and noticed immeditate stiffness in the fork and BB areas. I rode Record Ultra for the first year and switched to DA 10 for the other year and notice no difference in terms of stiffness or weight. Currently I am back to Record Ultra Torque and use both Campy Zondas and a set of Bonrager Aelous 5.0s for 'sunny days'. Either way the bike is a dream. Always sits at 15 or 16 pounds complete and never lets me down. My mates have Pinarellos and Colnagos and have had issues with both frames (Paris carbon and C50). Giant has always served me well and my buds are in awe at how well it looks and performs. Nuff said.


----------



## j.king

steel515 said:


> People here said the advanced was stiffer in the front end and bottom bracket where they felt flex, does this mean Composite is not stiff enough? Is Composite bad choice compared to other steel/carbon?



I felt the Composite to be like riding a noodle, very very smooth bike, but too flexy in my opinion.

The Advanced rode smoother and stiffer I thought, but still had a noticable amount of BB flex for what caliber of bike it was supposed to be.

My opinion, wait for the 2007 TCR Advanced 1, full Ultegra bike with the Advanced frame which has been "fixed" for 2007, supposed to retail for $3500. Go on Giant's web page and take a look at the 2007 Advanced frame, they added material to the BB area to increase stiffeness.

You also seriously need to ride both bikes. Either can be a significant investment and you want the bike that is stiff enough for you. We can give you our opinions all day and night but if you have been riding steel for awhile and are thinking of switching you should ride both bikes, what we say and what you feel could be on way opposite ends of the spectrum.

Link to a picture of the 2007 Advanced frame,
http://www2.giant-bicycles.com/en-US/bikes/road/825/24568/


----------



## SirBenno

I've got a 2007 TCR Advanced 1 on order, moving from a 2005 TCR Composite 1........I will let you know how they compare. Can't argue with the value though, given that the retail on the frame alone is $2800.


----------



## SirBenno

Compare BB areas and stays............




















New fork is supposed to be stiffer and lighter too. I think before they were trying to go a little more aero.


----------



## wildh

SirBenno,

Good comaprison pics. You can see some significant differences in multiple places. 

Another note of consideration is the difference between 9 sp cranksets and 10 sp...especially in the ultegra line. There is a very big difference in stiffness! I just got off my 04 giant tcr w/ 9sp and rode a 06 tcr w/ 10 sp. Very different. I think it was probably the Crankset that was stiffer more so than the frame, but I may be wrong. It would help to put them both on a trainer and watch the BB as you pedal.

As for me, I'm sold on the TCR Advanced 0, although I will likely change a few things like downgrade brakes and just use my Topolino AC29s.


----------



## sevencycle

I am not one to compare (125lbs). I have a 05 XS T-Mobile F1 Giant. Built to 13.53 lbs (with Clinchers). I did feel an increase in stiffness stability going to Easton SLX fork (plus a little less pink). I rode Litespeed Ghisallo and my Giant was way stiffer. Also stiffer than my Trek OCLV. Dollar for Dollar the TRC has the Advance beat but who is counting $$$.


----------



## sevencycle

Wow.Pictures of 2007 Advance BB area show huge increase in material. I guess there was an issue to address. Out board BB bearings would cut down flex too.


----------



## wildh

Yeah....I agree. Big differences in the frames...even at the head tube. The outboard BB bearings were the biggest difference between 9 spd Ultegra and 10 spd (Crankset). They feel completely different. I also noticed it seems to have increased the Q factor a bit.


----------



## sevencycle

I went back to standard cranks because I noticed wider Q-factor. Plus outboard systems are heavier and BB stiffnes is not a issue with my set up.


----------



## SirBenno

They screwed up the image at the head tube junction on the TCR advanced frame pic..........dunno why, but clearly that is not the way it actually is (where downtube meets the headtube)


----------



## wildh

SirBenno said:


> They screwed up the image at the head tube junction on the TCR advanced frame pic..........dunno why, but clearly that is not the way it actually is (where downtube meets the headtube)


You made me curious so I did a web search. This is from roadcyclinguk.com. Yes there is a difference. I was talking to the owner at a LBS this weekend and he said the images in the catalog and on-line are basically CAD images. Not sure if that matters.


----------



## SirBenno

Yeah I've seen those pics too.........you can sort of assume what the head tube junction will look like because nothing there has really changed (unlike the Anthem and Trance Advanced). It was more to show the comparison of the BB and Stays which I think are probably pretty accurate. It's funny, they started with shorter stays then in 2005/2006 they had longer stays and a completely round seat tube (save for the advanced) and now all of them are going back to shorter stays. That's some expensive manufacturing, carbon molds aint cheap. I think all of the TCR composite frames are a new design for 2007.


----------



## SirBenno

Anyone have any real pics of the 2007 Advanced 1...............mine should arrive in the next month or two so I'll post pics when it does, but until then..........


----------



## Bra T

Hi There, I'm new on the forum and his would be my firstpost.
I've been looking at replacing my 2002 Tuscany with a few bikes. THe TCR ADvanced ISP '07 being one of the bikes underconsideration.

There are huge difference between the 07 and the 06' Advanced ISP and since the 07 TCR is basically the 06TCR Advanced without ISP, I'd say that the TCR Advanced would be a firmer ride. Why?

Well they changed the layup. There more T1000 Carbon in the frame and apparently they are using a Nano resin (Basically there are carbon nano tubes in the resin to better fill the voids and add more carbon to the frame and less resin. This makes the frame stronger and improves fatigue life.)

The BB junction is bigger. The chain stays are beefier and the seat tube, top tube seat stay junction is also completely different to the 06 model.

I'm still waiting for a ride on the07 to compare but the changes are enough to make me prefer the Advanced to the std TCR (which is still an awesome bike cos the 06 TCR Adv was brilliant)


----------



## wildh

I can say from experience that the 07 Advanced is much improved on multiple levels over the TCR Comp. As stated above the frame material is actually different than on previous models and the design has changed. The tubes are no longer round, rather they are more triangular and the diameters are much larger. Almost all tube juncions are changed and the ride is IMO completely different. I have the advanced 0 w/o ISP and it really is a great bike.


----------

