# 2012 SL4 Pro Frameset



## nis240sxt (Oct 6, 2004)

Just got this last week. Pretty light compared to my 2011 Tarmac Comp American Flyer, little over 250 grams to be exact. 52cm frame weighed 950 and fork is 360. Going with SRAM S900 BB30 cranks since I really don't like how the BB adapters work. Can't wait to build it up


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

Congrats... beautiful frameset! :thumbsup:

I'm a little surprised at the frame weight. For comparison, my 52cm 2011 SL3 Pro frame weighs 961g's (11 more than yours), but the fork seems to be where the weight improvements are: Mine (cut) came in at 358g's, so yours uncut at 360 will easily better that.

Just curious... what adapters don't you like?


----------



## B.Garcia (Nov 21, 2011)

New to this thing! :mad2:


----------



## B.Garcia (Nov 21, 2011)

:thumbsup: Excuse me while i change my underwear HAHA =P
I'm getting the exact same frame (size 52) in Jan And I'm going to use wheels manufacturing adapter for my sram red crank-set which im taking off my other bike ('08 Tarmac Elite). Ive done my research and i don't think it would be hard to set up and don't think the loss of stiffness would be noticed well for me in this case. I cant freaking wait to see what it can do and what difference in stiffness it actually makes from my previous tarmac!


----------



## Irvine (Jul 23, 2010)

Is that neon red color? looks almost pink.


----------



## nis240sxt (Oct 6, 2004)

PJ352 said:


> Congrats... beautiful frameset! :thumbsup:
> 
> I'm a little surprised at the frame weight. For comparison, my 52cm 2011 SL3 Pro frame weighs 961g's (11 more than yours), but the fork seems to be where the weight improvements are: Mine (cut) came in at 358g's, so yours uncut at 360 will easily better that.
> 
> Just curious... what adapters don't you like?


Thanks for the compliments. I was expecting it to be lighter since they claimed it was 50 grams lighter than last year's sworks SL3 but no biggie since i'm not too much of a weight weenie. The fork is very light though. I just can't find confidence in the BB30 adapters since it relies on press fits instead of threading like the old standard. Have a hard time believing that these adapters will stay put. I was going to use my FSA cranks with adapters but changed my mind afer thinking it through.


----------



## nis240sxt (Oct 6, 2004)

B.Garcia said:


> :thumbsup: Excuse me while i change my underwear HAHA =P
> I'm getting the exact same frame (size 52) in Jan And I'm going to use wheels manufacturing adapter for my sram red crank-set which im taking off my other bike ('08 Tarmac Elite). Ive done my research and i don't think it would be hard to set up and don't think the loss of stiffness would be noticed well for me in this case. I cant freaking wait to see what it can do and what difference in stiffness it actually makes from my previous tarmac!


Your cranks with adapter will be fine. It's definitely worth the wait and you'll definitely feel a big time difference in stiffness, ride, etc... since you're coming from an older generation tarmac. I currently have an SL2 and rode my friend's SL4 Pro and was blown away just from a ride down the street. That's why I had to have it. The color is not pink, it's just a very fluorescent red, definitely pops! Hang in there, it's worth the wait.


----------



## roadworthy (Nov 11, 2011)

Handsome frameset...and quite light well under 3 lbs. Did it come with a seatpost?...did you weigh the seatpost?

As to the BB30 'adapters'...presuming you mean adaptors for an external bearing crank meant for threaded BB...completely agree. Run BB30 cranks when in Rome i.e. you have a BB30 frameset...what the frame is meant for and will be a lighter and stiffer set up.
Btw did you order your Tarmac Pro as OSBB? Reason I ask is the Roubaix Pro frameset is available as a threaded BB only I believe.

A tip is...download the Specialized Installation manual for your BB...Specialized spec's green Loctite for the bearings. Also, be sure to check that the wave washer that comes with your Sram cranks will be in about the middle of its deflection displacement...use shims that come with the crank and download the Sram installation manual as well to help set up it. Without adequate axial preload, BB30 bearings tend to make noise...hence all the complaints of guys who don't set them up properly on the web...even if loctited in place.

Also, for hidden cable routing, have a look at the following video. Best to cross the cables in front of the head tube for lowest cable drag:
Tarmac-Amira Internal Cable Routing on Vimeo
Further, within the video, download the cable routing PDF referenced. Forearmed with all the installation PDF's your build should go smoothly...all about attention to detail for the best running bike.

Beautiful frame and good luck with the build. I have a Roubaix frameset on order and why I have looked into the PDF procedures.


----------



## stover (Apr 24, 2010)

Very nice. The SL4 is a fantastic frame. I test rode one a few weeks ago and was very impressed.


----------



## ukbloke (Sep 1, 2007)

roadworthy said:


> Btw did you order your Tarmac Pro as OSBB?


According to the web-site, the 2012 Tarmac Pro frames are OSBB only (actually, all Tarmac SL-4 frames are OSBB only).


----------



## roadworthy (Nov 11, 2011)

ukbloke said:


> According to the web-site, the 2012 Tarmac Pro frames are OSBB only (actually, all Tarmac SL-4 frames are OSBB only).


Thanks for the clarification. Interesting that Specialized would distinguish the Roubaix from Tarmac Pro framesets in the context of the BB...each available as frameset without Specialized crank as a module which would be more conducive to BB30. Perhaps the Tarmac is considered more of a racing frame and therefore some would appreciate a BB30 crankset. I have to say, I prefer a threaded BB though I am not quick to bash BB30 as some do. Then there is PF30 which Specialized utilizes for _both_ S-works Tarmac _and _Roubaix frames. For some reason, Specialized doesn't differentiate S-work frames and yet they do their Pro framesets. A bit surprising. I actually would have expected the Roubaix Pro to be BB30 as the Tarmac SL4 Pro is...but Specialized apparently decided against this direction....perhaps based upon the Roubaix being directed toward older riders...at least the demographic...with less watt output and therefore not needing the incremental BB stiffness of BB30.


----------



## ukbloke (Sep 1, 2007)

roadworthy said:


> Interesting that Specialized would distinguish the Roubaix from Tarmac Pro framesets in the context of the BB...


Specialized are in transition on both Tarmac and Roubaix from threaded to OSBB. They started at the top-end and are pushing this down through the entire line-up of frames and bikes. The differentiation you see this year is just because Tarmac and Roubaix upgrades are a year out of step. Roughly they bring out new frames every other year for Tarmac and Roubaix, but they don't do both in the same model year. This year Tarmac gets an SL-4 and OSBB through-out the line (almost). My prediction is that Roubaix gets this treatment next year. Sometimes Roubaix gets the new stuff earlier, eg. internal frame routing, it just depends on timing. Your 2012 Roubaix Pro is probably the last model year that you could buy that frame-set threaded.


----------



## ukbloke (Sep 1, 2007)

nis240sxt said:


> I just can't find confidence in the BB30 adapters since it relies on press fits instead of threading like the old standard. Have a hard time believing that these adapters will stay put. I was going to use my FSA cranks with adapters but changed my mind afer thinking it through.


The press-fit part comes from the PF30 bearings in the frame. You have bought into that already by getting the OSBB frame regardless of which cranks you pick. The way I look at it the adapter simply adapts the Shimano (or SRAM GXP) crank inner width and outer axle diameter to match that of the BB30 crank standard. The rest of the BB is identical or equivalent either way. I don't see any mechanical issues with the adapter itself, presuming that it is well designed and manufactured to good tolerances. The adapter is just about the simplest component on your bike, and the lack of feedback of issues with the adapter points to these being good. Of course, a Shimano crank plus adapter doesn't get you any of the claimed advantages of a BB30 crank - certainly it is going to be heavier. However, for example, if you already have a group-set or your want to stay all Shimano in your drive-train, then this is a good solution. Having gone with an OSBB frame, one can always switch to a BB30 crank later.

There are only two things that hold me back from believing that an OSBB frame is the best of both worlds. One is the creaks/clicks that some owners report here. I'd like to believe that this is just poor set-up but the jury seems to still be out (e.g. Specialized changed their "wavy washer" equivalent recently, and added their own adapters this year, and not heard much feedback on either yet). The other is that Shimano have not announced what they are going to do in the future. It looks like they are staying with their current crank standard, but they have talked of doing something new with the BB in the next version of Dura Ace.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

ukbloke said:


> The press-fit part comes from the PF30 bearings in the frame. You have bought into that already by getting the OSBB frame regardless of which cranks you pick. The way I look at it the adapter simply adapts the Shimano (or SRAM GXP) crank inner width and outer axle diameter to match that of the BB30 crank standard. The rest of the BB is identical or equivalent either way. I don't see any mechanical issues with the adapter itself, presuming that it is well designed and manufactured to good tolerances. The adapter is just about the simplest component on your bike, and the lack of feedback of issues with the adapter points to these being good. Of course, a Shimano crank plus adapter doesn't get you any of the claimed advantages of a BB30 crank - certainly it is going to be heavier. However, for example, if you already have a group-set or your want to stay all Shimano in your drive-train, then this is a good solution. Having gone with an OSBB frame, one can always switch to a BB30 crank later.
> 
> There are only two things that hold me back from believing that an OSBB frame is the best of both worlds. One is the creaks/clicks that some owners report here. I'd like to believe that this is just poor set-up but the jury seems to still be out (e.g. Specialized changed their "wavy washer" equivalent recently, and added their own adapters this year, and not heard much feedback on either yet). The other is that Shimano have not announced what they are going to do in the future. It looks like they are staying with their current crank standard, but they have talked of doing something new with the BB in the next version of Dura Ace.


+1 on the comments re: the adapters. JMO, but that's the way I'd go with that frame. 

I also generally agree on the BB30 comments, although I'd go a step further and say that (save for the minimal weight gain) I've not seen any reliable data supporting increased stiffness, so I see no real payback.


----------



## roadworthy (Nov 11, 2011)

ukbloke said:


> Specialized are in transition on both Tarmac and Roubaix from threaded to OSBB. They started at the top-end and are pushing this down through the entire line-up of frames and bikes. The differentiation you see this year is just because Tarmac and Roubaix upgrades are a year out of step. Roughly they bring out new frames every other year for Tarmac and Roubaix, but they don't do both in the same model year. This year Tarmac gets an SL-4 and OSBB through-out the line (almost). My prediction is that Roubaix gets this treatment next year. Sometimes Roubaix gets the new stuff earlier, eg. internal frame routing, it just depends on timing. Your 2012 Roubaix Pro is probably the last model year that you could buy that frame-set threaded.


I believe its pretty safe to say that Specialized like other top brands is in a constant state of design evolution...not immune to running engineering changes during the model year as well...some transparent to the public to mitigate liability if a design aspect is less than robust and other changes more blatant. You are probably right...Roubaix Pro maybe OSBB next year. But, oddly enough...there are even examples this year. Sometimes design changes are nuanced and other times relatively obvious. For example, one member mentioned to me that Specialized re-engineered the plastic sleeve that fits in the rear chainstay of new hidden cable Roubaixs and Tarmacs. The framesets didn't change...but this small piece called a chainstay noodle did...no doubt to fractionally reduces cable drag which is the achilles heel of internally cabled framesets.

As to what Specialized calls OSBB...a bit of an enigma wrapped in a conundrum. Forget dissecting the design. BB30 has been out for a few years now and is relatively tried and true in spite of the outcry of those that can't set one up. As to PJ's comments about definable stiffness. Most can't flex a 24mm external bearing BSA crank let alone a 30mm spindle like a BB30...but it can be and is made lighter because of increased moment of inertia...reduced material content i.e. reduced wall thickness of spindle + larger diameter = stiffer + lighter weight. Will it be detectable to the average rider? No.
Then there is PF30...which is distinctively different and also what Specialized calls generically OSBB which uses the same bearings as BB30 but an entirely different execution. 

The ambiguity with respect to the Roubaix is a bit perplexing really. As mentioned Tarmac and Roubaix are both PF-30 for top of the line performance S-works framesets. There is no differentiation in other words....BB's are the same. Also, there are examples of the Roubaix Pro on the web with BB30….what Specialized again coins generically OSBB…Over Size BB. also see pic below The same nomenclature is used for BB30 and PF30 which is a bit unfortunate. I have posted a pic below of a Roubaix Pro...in 2012 color of Black with Neon blue and oddly it is BB30. And yet Specialized is shipping the Roubaix Pro in the US as threaded which btw I appreciate...no loctite to mess with. My bike shop called today and my Roubaix Pro frameset just arrived and it has a threaded BB. I am excited to build it btw.

Perhaps some of the OSBB/threaded BB mixing is geographical...not sure...perhaps BB30Roubaix Pro frames are shipped ostensibly to Europe as is the example below. Contrast the BB with the pic from Specialized website...BB shown on their website for the Roubaix Pro is clearly threaded as is my frame...and another RBR member who just received his is threaded as well. I also included a pic of PF30 for the Roubaix S-works. Three BB's on two different model Roubaixs...hard to fathom.


----------



## tommyturbo (Jan 24, 2002)

Back to the original post regarding frame weight comparisons. Most manufacturers weigh their frames totally devoid of parts such as seatpost clamp, RD hanger, FD brazeon, cable stops, bottle cage bolts stickers, etc. Whether they then tell the truth or "round down" is another question. 

My size 56 2011 S-Works Tarmac SL3 threaded frame weighed 968g with most of that stuff still attached. I'm guessing that my frame would come in around 897g totally bare.

I guess my point is that it's hard to compare different frame weights unless you know that the frames were weighed bare or with the same parts included.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

tommyturbo said:


> ... my point is that it's hard to compare different frame weights unless you know that the frames were weighed bare or with the same parts included.


I agree and that's a good point. FWIW, my stated weight was with all the parts mentioned attached, including the BB cable guide. 

After my initial post, I found where I weighed the *un*cut fork. Weighed in at 390g's, so 30g's more than the OP's.


----------



## tommyturbo (Jan 24, 2002)

My frame weight also included the BB cable guide. I guess I forgot that one; out of sight, out of mind

My uncut fork was 388g.


----------



## nis240sxt (Oct 6, 2004)

Thanks for all the comments. You have to take frame weights with a grain of salt no doubt. Mine was also weighed with all those mentioned and also with all those internal cable guides, etc..I didn't have a choice on BB type but the SL4 won me over so that wasn't a deal breaker. Let me get this straight and please correct me if i'm wrong. The adapters (shimano, sram, fsa, etc.) press into the BB bore correct? The bearings in the adapter are located externally outside the BB bore? Just wanted to get the story straight.


----------



## ukbloke (Sep 1, 2007)

nis240sxt said:


> Thanks for all the comments. You have to take frame weights with a grain of salt no doubt. Mine was also weighed with all those mentioned and also with all those internal cable guides, etc..I didn't have a choice on BB type but the SL4 won me over so that wasn't a deal breaker. Let me get this straight and please correct me if i'm wrong. The adapters (shimano, sram, fsa, etc.) press into the BB bore correct? The bearings in the adapter are located externally outside the BB bore? Just wanted to get the story straight.


No, with the Wheels Manufacturing adapters you press the bearings in first, and then the adapters. So the adapters are between the bearings and the crank, not between the frame and the bearings. This is completely different to old style BB30 adapters that basically fitted an entire standard threaded BB shell inside of the OSBB.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

nis240sxt said:


> Thanks for all the comments. You have to take frame weights with a grain of salt no doubt. Mine was also weighed with all those mentioned and also with all those internal cable guides, etc..I didn't have a choice on BB type but the SL4 won me over so that wasn't a deal breaker. Let me get this straight and please correct me if i'm wrong. The adapters (shimano, sram, fsa, etc.) press into the BB bore correct? The bearings in the adapter are located externally outside the BB bore? Just wanted to get the story straight.


From your description, I can see why you're wary of going with the adapters.  

It goes like this... the OE (6806) bearings are installed into the OSBB shell, then the adapters press into the bearings, then you install your crankset. No special tools are required and the adapters are easily removed if/ when you opt to go with a BB30 crankset.

Here's some additional info:
Wheels Manufacturing BB30 Adapter Now Available - Bike Rumor
Interesting comment at the end of the article.

2011 Wheels Mfg BB30 Adapter for Shimano - Competitive Cyclist

The adapters are available for both Shimano and SRAM compatible cranksets.


----------



## ukbloke (Sep 1, 2007)

roadworthy said:


> As to what Specialized calls OSBB...a bit of an enigma wrapped in a conundrum. ... Then there is PF30...which is distinctively different and also what Specialized calls generically OSBB which uses the same bearings as BB30 but an entirely different execution.


BB30 is Cannondale's invention and their terminology. Specialized renamed it as OSBB simply to avoid giving recognition to Cannondale, another bike manufacturer. Specialized's first version was the Al OSBB shell, and identical to Cannondale. But then Specialized switched to PF30 (I don't recall whose name that is, maybe FSA or Truvativ) and used a carbon OSBB shell. They use the Al versus Carbon shell naming to distinguish them.



> Also, there are examples of the Roubaix Pro on the web with BB30….what Specialized again coins generically OSBB…Over Size BB. also see pic below


This picture came up in another thread. It appears to be a one-of-a-kind test/pre-production model. The same seller was selling other odd-ball Specialized frames too.



> My bike shop called today and my Roubaix Pro frameset just arrived and it has a threaded BB. I am excited to build it btw.


Awesome, let us all know how it works out!


----------



## ukbloke (Sep 1, 2007)

PJ352 said:


> The adapters are available for both Shimano and SRAM compatible cranksets.


Great post - I was too lazy to look up the links. 

Also keep in mind that there are different versions of the adapter for PF30/Shimano and BB30/Shimano.


----------



## nis240sxt (Oct 6, 2004)

Ahhh, thanks for the clarification that's much better now. One more thing though, what does the crank spindle spin on actually if you press the adapter directly into the inside bore of the BB30 bearings?


----------



## ukbloke (Sep 1, 2007)

nis240sxt said:


> Ahhh, thanks for the clarification that's much better now. One more thing though, what does the crank spindle spin on actually if you press the adapter directly into the inside bore of the BB30 bearings?


The crank and the adapter spin together on the bearing.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

ukbloke said:


> Also keep in mind that there are different versions of the adapter for PF30/Shimano and BB30/Shimano.


Yes. The Wheels Manufacturing site has more comprehensive info, but seems to be 'unavailable' at the moment.
http://wheelsmfg.com/content/section/31/67/


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

nis240sxt said:


> Ahhh, thanks for the clarification that's much better now. One more thing though, what does the crank spindle spin on actually if you press the adapter directly into the inside bore of the BB30 bearings?


The spindle slides through the adapters and the adapters (pressed into the bearings) spin on them.

A slight oversimplification, but the only difference between this setup and a true BB30 setup is the adapters interface between the 24mm spindle and bearings, where with BB30 the 30mm spindle runs through the bearings.


----------



## nis240sxt (Oct 6, 2004)

Ok, thanks ukbloke. I just wasn't sure how the whole thing worked. It still seems like a crutch type setup to me. I'll take my chances with BB30 and let ya know how it goes.


----------



## lfcorrea (Oct 28, 2011)

Congrats!! 

I bought the SL4 Pro SRAM Red a week ago and am loving it, already put a little over 200 miles and could not be happier.

Enjoy!


----------



## ukbloke (Sep 1, 2007)

nis240sxt said:


> Ok, thanks ukbloke. I just wasn't sure how the whole thing worked. It still seems like a crutch type setup to me. I'll take my chances with BB30 and let ya know how it goes.


Fair enough. Actually, didn't you get the Specialized version of the adapters with your frame, per the picture on their web site?


----------



## roadworthy (Nov 11, 2011)

nis240sxt said:


> Ahhh, thanks for the clarification that's much better now. One more thing though, what does the crank spindle spin on actually if you press the adapter directly into the inside bore of the BB30 bearings?


The other guys did a good job of explaining the use of adapters...when adapting a crankset designed for an external bearing threaded BB to a BB30 bike...BB30 is industry name for your OSBB.
A conventional threaded outboard crank has a spindle diameter of 24mm. BB30 bearings have an ID of what their name implies...30mm. The spacers space in two dimensions...radially....6mm and laterally to account for bearings being within the BB shell versus outboard. So the crank spindle rides on a donut spacer that takes up the difference in diameter between the bearings and the crank spindle. OK...what spins you may ask? Spacers are generally a delrin or a lubrice material. The spindle is not a press into the bearings...it is a slip fit. Even if the spacer itself is a slip fit into the bearing inner race...its the bearing inner race that rotates in tandem with the crank spindle. They maybe some angular creep of the spindle relative to the adapter but very small relative to rotation of the bearings themselves. As to the running spacers...they work wonderfully well for the reason that the spacers are a natural sound deadner. A suggestion is...Loctite the bearings to the BB alloy cups if you want dead silent operation. This isn't a mandatory step but will save you hassle down the road if the press isn't super tight and/or the bearings aren't perfectly seated in respective bores.
As to the notion of running spacers...that is a philosophical question. Most will be just fine with it. Me? If I am building a new frame...which btw I am...picking up a Roubaix Pro frameset today...but with threaded BB...I would run a crank designed for the that BB. This is my purist engineering instinct. I want to exploit the benefit of BB30 in other words...run a 30mm crank spindle and no adapters. Will running an adapted crank be noticable to the average rider? With almost certainty no. But for a fresh build, I would ebay my old crank and install a BB30 crank. 
Hope that helps.
PS: be sure to download all the PDF's I referenced to aid your build. This will help greatly and post with any questions you have along the way.


----------



## roadworthy (Nov 11, 2011)

tommyturbo said:


> Back to the original post regarding frame weight comparisons. Most manufacturers weigh their frames totally devoid of parts such as seatpost clamp, RD hanger, FD brazeon, cable stops, bottle cage bolts stickers, etc. Whether they then tell the truth or "round down" is another question.
> 
> My size 56 2011 S-Works Tarmac SL3 threaded frame weighed 968g with most of that stuff still attached. I'm guessing that my frame would come in around 897g totally bare.
> 
> I guess my point is that it's hard to compare different frame weights unless you know that the frames were weighed bare or with the same parts included.


It is a good point and really why I have never been highly focused on a few grams of weight and why mfr's are reluctant to engage in a game of liar's poker when it comes to what content as you say portends a given weight. Frame size matters as well of course.
For reference...see the new Roubaix framset on the scale below. Crunching the quick nos....your frame weighed 968g + 388g uncut fork = 1356 = 2.99 lbs or within a few grams of the 2012 Roubaix Pro size 56 including seatpost.


----------



## roadworthy (Nov 11, 2011)

ukbloke said:


> BB30 is Cannondale's invention and their terminology. Specialized renamed it as OSBB simply to avoid giving recognition to Cannondale, another bike manufacturer. Specialized's first version was the Al OSBB shell, and identical to Cannondale. But then Specialized switched to PF30 (I don't recall whose name that is, maybe FSA or Truvativ) and used a carbon OSBB shell. They use the Al versus Carbon shell naming to distinguish them.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Understand why Specialized did what they did. BB30 and PF30 is just more clear is all.
Will be interesting to see if Specialized transistions solely to PF30 in the imminent future as PF30 is natively quieter than BB30 without metal on metal bearing interface and PF30 a la all Specialized S-works frames is 'cheaper' to produce.

You are probably right about that oddball Roubaix Pro with OSBB. Must be a pre-production run as you say. Interesting that it would find its way onto ebay but as I recall you are correct...that seller had different paint job framesets as well so wonder if he had a pipeline to Specialized' prototype department.

As to the new Roubaix Pro build. Absolutely. I try to build new bikes in the winter when there is snow outside and can't ride...so will take my time with the build to get the bike set up just right for the spring. Have a few small parts on order and will begin with cutting the steerer shortly.


----------



## bernithebiker (Sep 26, 2011)

I did the same thing. I drove 150 miles to pick up my SL4 S-Works in September. I was planning to use my SRAM Red cranks on it.

When I saw the adaptors I would have to use, I immediately asked how much the S-Works OSBB crankset was - ouch, eyewateringly expensive, and I had already stumped up alot for the frame, but for me there was no way I was gonna chuck away the chance to use a crankset almost designed specifically for my bike.

So I bought it, and they installed it there and then. 

So glad I did, it is a thing of beauty and very light. Even dare I say very aero?!

And it sits ultra close to the BB shell, so Q factor must be low, and it looks way cool.


----------



## roadworthy (Nov 11, 2011)

bernithebiker said:


> I did the same thing. I drove 150 miles to pick up my SL4 S-Works in September. I was planning to use my SRAM Red cranks on it.
> 
> When I saw the adaptors I would have to use, I immediately asked how much the S-Works OSBB crankset was - ouch, eyewateringly expensive, and I had already stumped up alot for the frame, but for me there was no way I was gonna chuck away the chance to use a crankset almost designed specifically for my bike.
> 
> ...


Yeah...what I would do as well. There are lots of great cranks out there. Since I run Campy, I would discard my UT crank if BB30. Of all the adaptable external bearing cranks designed for threaded BB's, Campy cranks adapt the worst to BB30...but in their native habitat  i.e. a threaded BB, they are terrific.
I like Cannondale BB30, Rotor and even Sram. Of all the adapter cranks out there Shimano probably work the best.
Post a pic of your Spesh cranks if you have a chance.


----------



## Adrianinkc (Nov 13, 2011)

I love that frameset.


----------



## bernithebiker (Sep 26, 2011)

You can see the whole bike (and cranks) here;


http://forums.roadbikereview.com/specialized/specialized-bike-pic-thread-32889-50.html#post298663


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

bernithebiker said:


> ... Q factor must be low...


Not to derail this thread, but just a FYI... less (or more) q-factor isn't automatically good or bad. It's related to cleat placement, and should reflect an individuals anatomy/ riding style. If it doesn't, it can cause knee issues.


----------



## bernithebiker (Sep 26, 2011)

PJ352 said:


> Not to derail this thread, but just a FYI... less (or more) q-factor isn't automatically good or bad. It's related to cleat placement, and should reflect an individuals anatomy/ riding style. If it doesn't, it can cause knee issues.


I always thought that a low q factor was a good thing, but i see your point. 

In any case, I'm quite comfy with them and I like the feeling of my legs being close to the frame. And it's aero, right?!

BTW, my cleats (I just put them on my new Lake 236 shoes (excellent!!)) don't really have much lateral movement available, just fore and aft.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

bernithebiker said:


> I always thought that a low q factor was a good thing, but i see your point.
> 
> In any case, I'm quite comfy with them and I like the feeling of my legs being close to the frame. And it's aero, right?!
> 
> BTW, my cleats (I just put them on my new Lake 236 shoes (excellent!!)) don't really have much lateral movement available, just fore and aft.


No, as stated, low (or high) q-factors aren't _by default_ a good thing. 

Since it's fit related, comfort equates to efficiency, so if (as you say) you're comfortable, odds are that your setup suites your anatomy/ riding style (specifically, pedal stroke). Your knees would tell you if that weren't the case. Medial (inner) and lateral knee pain can occur with mismatches.

Low q factor being aero is... well... arguable, but ok. 

Agree on the limits to lateral adjustment on the cleats, but there is some. And IME it's more likely that a given rider will need to position their feet slightly outward, thus the availability of pedal extenders.


----------



## Rugergundog (Apr 2, 2011)

I have been riding a SL4 pro (white one  for several months now and a few thousand miles with the adapters. There really is no potential for a problem. The BB uses the same bearings that are supplied. The adapters just slide in to take up a gap and are held snug by the mounting of the crank; i run a Ultegra group on mine. Unless your crank falls off you are not going to have an issue with the adapter, more likely to have a bb bearing fail from use than your crank fall of if you put it on correct the first time.

Cheers
Bob


----------



## GeneT (Feb 17, 2008)

*Great Thread*

All the info is much appreciated. I hope to be test riding an SL4 shortly which follows a number of other bikes I've tested recently. The Tarmac has comes highly recommended from a couple of friends / racers. The information on the Ultegra set is timely too as Shimano components via Performance (price matching Nashbar) have been pretty attractive. 

In considering a build up as opposed to complete bike and either could happen if I go the Tarmac route, I'm wondering if there are any thoughts on the distinctions between the Tarmac SL4 and the Tarrmac S-Works SL4 frames. The technical details aren't too elaborate on the Specialized WEB site other than the bottom bracket shells are different (I'm assuming per the discussions above) and the S-Works version uses FACT 11r carbon vs FACT 10r. Thanks for any thoughts!


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

GeneT said:


> All the info is much appreciated. I hope to be test riding an SL4 shortly which follows a number of other bikes I've tested recently. The Tarmac has comes highly recommended from a couple of friends / racers. The information on the Ultegra set is timely too as Shimano components via Performance (price matching Nashbar) have been pretty attractive.
> 
> In considering a build up as opposed to complete bike and either could happen if I go the Tarmac route,* I'm wondering if there are any thoughts on the distinctions between the Tarmac SL4 and the Tarrmac S-Works SL4 frames. *The technical details aren't too elaborate on the Specialized WEB site other than the bottom bracket shells are different (I'm assuming per the discussions above) and the S-Works version uses FACT 11r carbon vs FACT 10r. Thanks for any thoughts!


You might want to read this:
http://forums.roadbikereview.com/specialized/tarmac-11r-10r-sl4-sl3-what-gives-269237.html


----------



## GeneT (Feb 17, 2008)

Good reading, that's much!


----------



## BikerNutz77 (Sep 10, 2011)

roadworthy said:


> It is a good point and really why I have never been highly focused on a few grams of weight and why mfr's are reluctant to engage in a game of liar's poker when it comes to what content as you say portends a given weight. Frame size matters as well of course.
> For reference...see the new Roubaix framset on the scale below. Crunching the quick nos....your frame weighed 968g + 388g uncut fork = 1356 = 2.99 lbs or within a few grams of the 2012 Roubaix Pro size 56 including seatpost.


Hey - that bike looks familiar......:wink5:


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

GeneT said:


> All the info is much appreciated. I hope to be test riding an SL4 shortly which follows a number of other bikes I've tested recently. The Tarmac has comes highly recommended from a couple of friends / racers. The information on the Ultegra set is timely too as Shimano components via Performance (price matching Nashbar) have been pretty attractive.
> 
> *In considering a build up as opposed to complete bike and either could happen if I go the Tarmac route, I'm wondering if there are any thoughts on the distinctions between the Tarmac SL4 and the Tarrmac S-Works SL4 frames. The technical details aren't too elaborate on the Specialized WEB site other than the bottom bracket shells are different (I'm assuming per the discussions above) and the S-Works version uses FACT 11r carbon vs FACT 10r.* Thanks for any thoughts!


Specialized marketing strikes again!


----------



## B.Garcia (Nov 21, 2011)

Heres mine :thumbsup:
Building it up this week


----------



## nis240sxt (Oct 6, 2004)

Sweet :thumbsup: Please keep us updated!


----------



## TheBarista (Jul 11, 2011)

Nice! Another SL4 Pro in the incubator!!!


----------



## B.Garcia (Nov 21, 2011)

Man my LBS is making me wait to get my bike! I left my old bike to get a component swipe for the SL4 Tuesday and they said they would have it ready by today (Thursday), now they are telling me for another day!  I already paid the moolah for it ($150) on tuesday. They should have it ready by now! 

Curse impatience! Haha :lol:


----------



## tiflow_21 (Nov 21, 2005)

B.Garcia said:


> Man my LBS is making me wait to get my bike! I left my old bike to get a component swipe for the SL4 Tuesday and they said they would have it ready by today (Thursday), now they are telling me for another day!  I already paid the moolah for it ($150) on tuesday. They should have it ready by now!
> 
> Curse impatience! Haha :lol:


Just be glad you have the frame. I ordered a 61cm SL4 Pro Red back in September and still no sign of it... getting a bit impatient. This is the first specialized I've ordered and already tired of their delays with seemingly no good information as to when the bike should appear. It was supposed to be here late December/Early January. Still holding out hope it'll be here soon... will not be excited if it gets delayed into early season like everyone's mountain bikes last year.


----------



## B.Garcia (Nov 21, 2011)

Almost done. specialized needs to send some more top hats then it would be done. 

white is going to go eventually. Any suggestions? 

Will post once fully completed :thumbsup:


----------



## haulinbowtie (Aug 28, 2011)

I'm waiting on a 61cm Sl4 Pro Red too. I was told it should be here end of month. Hope it doesn't slide out.


----------



## CEARACING (Sep 5, 2011)

B.Garcia said:


> Almost done. specialized needs to send some more top hats then it would be done.
> 
> white is going to go eventually. Any suggestions?
> 
> Will post once fully completed :thumbsup:


Amazing bike mate!


----------



## Sharil (Mar 10, 2011)

Upload more photos plx! This framebuild looks awesome maty


----------



## marcm (Jan 28, 2012)

nice!


----------



## B.Garcia (Nov 21, 2011)

*Here y'all go!*

the one with the deep dish is the more current one.


----------

