Emonda SL vs SLR

robertlukescott
robertlukescott Posts: 14
edited January 2019 in Road buying advice
Hey folks,

I’m a junior and I’m racing at a pretty highl level this year, I also conveniently work at a Trek dealer and get some pretty good prices on bikes. I’m in the market for an Émonda and I know the technical differences between both. The SLR is made of 700 series oclv, lighter, more responsive, et cetera. I want your option on which I should go for. I’m on a fairly limited budget, but I can fit a SLR frameset somewhere into my budget. The reason I’m asking this question is durability. After working in a shop for nearly a year, I’ve encountered two cracked SLR framesets and not a single cracked SL. Junior racing is sketchy and broken carbon components are common (I cracked a pair of 303’s in Le Tour de l’Abitibi last year). I’ve also been in a race with a guy who shattered his SLR fork. Anyways, what do you all think? Thanks.

Comments

  • cougie
    cougie Posts: 22,512
    I think you've answered your own question there. Go for the SL.
  • robertlukescott
    robertlukescott Posts: 14
    cougie wrote:
    I think you've answered your own question there. Go for the SL.
    Yeah, that’s what my gut feeling is. I could actually do a SL frame with a Ceramic Speed BB for under $1000.
  • arlowood
    arlowood Posts: 2,561
    If you' re concerned about the durability of carbon in the junior race environment, why not opt for an ALR.

    The ALR6 looks like a good package and would be a bit more robust than the carbon equivalent

    https://www.rutlandcycling.com/bikes/ro ... ack_380963
  • svetty
    svetty Posts: 1,904
    robertlukescott wrote:
    cougie wrote:
    I think you've answered your own question there. Go for the SL.
    Yeah, that’s what my gut feeling is. I could actually do a SL frame with a Ceramic Speed BB for under $1000.

    I would also get the SL but I wouldn't spend $$$s on Ceramic Speed. Get some nice wheels instead.
    FFS! Harden up and grow a pair :D
  • robertlukescott
    robertlukescott Posts: 14
    arlowood wrote:
    If you' re concerned about the durability of carbon in the junior race environment, why not opt for an ALR.

    The ALR6 looks like a good package and would be a bit more robust than the carbon equivalent

    https://www.rutlandcycling.com/bikes/ro ... ack_380963

    Yeah I have an older ALR and I do like it, but the geometry is a bit slack and I’m running out of seatpost.
  • robertlukescott
    robertlukescott Posts: 14
    Svetty wrote:
    robertlukescott wrote:
    cougie wrote:
    I think you've answered your own question there. Go for the SL.
    Yeah, that’s what my gut feeling is. I could actually do a SL frame with a Ceramic Speed BB for under $1000.

    I would also get the SL but I wouldn't spend $$$s on Ceramic Speed. Get some nice wheels instead.

    Good point, however the BB90 kit is roughly $200 for me through my EP account with Trek.

Categories