TCR Advanced SL Vs TCR Advanced Pro

Anonymous

Friend of mine is looking at getting a Giant TCR and its a toss up between getting the SL with the integral seatpost or the Pro with a seperate seatpost but would come in at 400 cheaper but made of lesser quality CF.

I would go with the pro but he wants to know how much better the SL frame is over the pro since its a different carbon fibre used.

Choice of his is the TCR Advanced SL 2 in hi vis yellow or the Advanced Pro 1 Black/green/blue which is about 400 cheaper.

Is the SL really worth an extra 400? All other specs look the same for these 2 bikes - wheels , groupset, finishing kit etc so it really is only the frame.

TIA

bristolpete

Maglia Rosa wrote:

Friend of mine is looking at getting a Giant TCR and its a toss up between getting the SL with the integral seatpost or the Pro with a seperate seatpost but would come in at 400 cheaper but made of lesser quality CF.

I would go with the pro but he wants to know how much better the SL frame is over the pro since its a different carbon fibre used.

Choice of his is the TCR Advanced SL 2 in hi vis yellow or the Advanced Pro 1 Black/green/blue which is about 400 cheaper.

Is the SL really worth an extra 400? All other specs look the same for these 2 bikes - wheels , groupset, finishing kit etc so it really is only the frame.

TIA

A few debates doing the rounds on American bike forums about the alleged ride quality difference. Some say the SL night and day difference, others say not so. The real caveat in my opinion is the ISP which whilst as an initial purchase is great, if you decide to move a bike on can leave a second hand sale hanging due to the cut and shut nature of an ISP, though a realise there is a bell curve of leg length to size.

Having seen both bikes up close in Giant Bristol, on looks alone I would buy the SL2 as absolutely, unbelievably stunning bike and worth every penny. A real head turner and a bike I would want to ride for sure. The Pro 1 is a beautiful bike too, not quite got the 'holy smoke' appeal of the SL2 to my eyes though, and honestly, I think most consumer riders would struggle to note a ride quality difference at this spec given the wheels are the same. But, all things being equal and given that the SL2 is the 'better' bike I would guess I would be marginally, stiffer / livelier than the Pro 1.

This may be worth a read -

http://www.cyclist.co.uk/giant/tcr-adva ... o-0-review

Hope this helps ?!

Anonymous

Cheers

I must admit after seeing the SL2 in the flesh it looks a stunning bike and I am not a Giant fan . Extremely slender but then so is my Bianchi in places. The ISL was something that he was a bit concerned with as he does move his bikes on after a while.

bristolpete

Maglia Rosa wrote:

Cheers

I must admit after seeing the SL2 in the flesh it looks a stunning bike and I am not a Giant fan . Extremely slender but then so is my Bianchi in places. The ISL was something that he was a bit concerned with as he does move his bikes on after a while.

Yes, begs the question, how can they trim away the fat, yet leave such as stiff bike there ? Very tapered in places for sure and a bike for the whippets I would imagine.