New Giant TCR Advanced announced

Back by popular demand, the general all-things Road forum!

Moderator: robbosmans

scapewalker
Posts: 261
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2019 9:21 am
Location: Austria

by scapewalker

robeambro wrote:
Wed Apr 08, 2020 7:26 pm
What I don't understand is that Giant seem to not follow a coherent policy. IIRC, the new Defy had integrated cables. Now they launch a new TCR and it doesn't have integrated cables? I guess it would have made the bike too heavy, but still - quite a puzzling choice.
I assume they could save quite a bit of weight which might allow pros to fit 65mm wheels while still hitting 6,8kg or at least getting really close for certain stages.

Swapping 42s for 65s arguably has much bigger impact on aerodynamics than hidden cables or disc brakes for that matter.

by Weenie


Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓    Broad Selection ✓    Worldwide Delivery ✓

www.starbike.com



Ritxis
Posts: 1119
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2012 3:00 pm
Location: San Sebastian

by Ritxis

what Giannt has to do is pay a little more attention to certain details........rear disc housing brake input to frame, they could have styled it a little more......it feels a little seedy :mrgreen:

guadzilla
Posts: 273
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 6:55 pm

by guadzilla

Karvalo wrote:
Thu Apr 09, 2020 8:51 am
guadzilla wrote:
Thu Apr 09, 2020 8:39 am
To me, it makes absolutely logical sense and clearly differentiates the TCR from the Defy.

Want a max aero bike or want fully concealed cables == get the Defy
You may be thinking of the Propel. The Defy is an endurance bike, it's clearly different to the TCR regardless of cabling.
Sorry, you are correct - I did indeed mean the Propel. :)

robeambro
Posts: 1829
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2018 6:21 pm

by robeambro

scapewalker wrote:
Thu Apr 09, 2020 10:15 am
robeambro wrote:
Wed Apr 08, 2020 7:26 pm
What I don't understand is that Giant seem to not follow a coherent policy. IIRC, the new Defy had integrated cables. Now they launch a new TCR and it doesn't have integrated cables? I guess it would have made the bike too heavy, but still - quite a puzzling choice.
I assume they could save quite a bit of weight which might allow pros to fit 65mm wheels while still hitting 6,8kg or at least getting really close for certain stages.

Swapping 42s for 65s arguably has much bigger impact on aerodynamics than hidden cables or disc brakes for that matter.
Arguably it's difficult to find things that have *lesser* of an impact than cables!! Especially on modern disc / wireless / whathaveyou bikes with neatly "guided" cables. For 99% of consumers it's purely an aesthetic thing.

And yes, probably a stem allowing ICR would beef up weight by 50/100g + some other weight to be added to the frame itself. Which would surely be minuscule and equally unimportant to actual performance, but it would make marketing the bike quite more difficult (it wouldn't be lighter than ie the Tarmac, it wouldn't be more aero.. It would just have integrated cables)

User avatar
Shpox
Posts: 89
Joined: Fri Jul 05, 2019 11:30 am

by Shpox

I have been patiently waiting for this moment for long ass time, holding off on selling my Propel.

If they do the GVA colours or some kind of Gold like Peak Torque's build, I'm in and the decision for Rim vs. Disc will go onto Disc for the better clearance. I will most likely build it from the frame up with Ultegra Di2 but with Dura Ace Rotors.

The only bug bears are ISP (yes we all know but it's no surprise) and I am not a fan of the routing for the cables. I don't really mind exposed cables but how they are routing into the Downtube is a bit messy for mine...

Other than this, it's the bike I've been waiting to get on. While my Propel is no doubt faster, it does not climb well (I was amazed at the TCR alst year) and not a go anywhere bike. I feel beat-up after 30kms on that frame where the TCR I will ride all day.

Also looking forward to Disc - 50-60mm Lightbicycle wheels and 25-28mm tyres on this bad boy. The only thing that would sweeten this is 9200 as it will either mean buying 9100 at a steal or getting nice improvements in 9200.

I'm glad COVID won't delay the frame too much because I was starting to think this would run into next year.

hannawald
Posts: 1706
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2016 7:28 pm
Location: Czech Republic

by hannawald

robeambro wrote:
Thu Apr 09, 2020 11:36 am
scapewalker wrote:
Thu Apr 09, 2020 10:15 am
robeambro wrote:
Wed Apr 08, 2020 7:26 pm
What I don't understand is that Giant seem to not follow a coherent policy. IIRC, the new Defy had integrated cables. Now they launch a new TCR and it doesn't have integrated cables? I guess it would have made the bike too heavy, but still - quite a puzzling choice.
I assume they could save quite a bit of weight which might allow pros to fit 65mm wheels while still hitting 6,8kg or at least getting really close for certain stages.

Swapping 42s for 65s arguably has much bigger impact on aerodynamics than hidden cables or disc brakes for that matter.
Arguably it's difficult to find things that have *lesser* of an impact than cables!! Especially on modern disc / wireless / whathaveyou bikes with neatly "guided" cables. For 99% of consumers it's purely an aesthetic thing.

And yes, probably a stem allowing ICR would beef up weight by 50/100g + some other weight to be added to the frame itself. Which would surely be minuscule and equally unimportant to actual performance, but it would make marketing the bike quite more difficult (it wouldn't be lighter than ie the Tarmac, it wouldn't be more aero.. It would just have integrated cables)
My Cannondale Supersix EVO has internal cable routing and my Farsports F1 bar are slightly more than 300g. So there is a way how to make it light. Surprised Giant has not found a way how to do it properly.

Pierre86
Posts: 229
Joined: Mon May 13, 2019 3:53 pm

by Pierre86

uraqt wrote:
Wed Apr 08, 2020 11:40 pm
Disc brakes are way more aero than caliper brakes because they permit a complete redesign of the bike with greater tire clearance between the fork legs and thus less turbulence.
I don't think that is an established fact, if it was all the modern track bikes would have went wide fork years ago and current the only wide fork is the Hope bike and they said it was to keep the turbulent air inline with the riders legs. Modern track bikes are bouncing back and forth beteen wide and narrow forks.

C
The hope is wide (much wider) for completely different reasons than any other track bike as you've mentioned, but the others are reasonably set and change based on their intended use:
Spoked wheel = wide fork (sprint/endurance events)
Disc wheel = narrow (time trials/pursuit)

Discs themselves aren't terribly un-aerodynamic compared to standard rim brakes but the bikes as a whole are slightly slower as a rule, systemsix aside.
robeambro wrote:
Thu Apr 09, 2020 11:36 am
scapewalker wrote:
Thu Apr 09, 2020 10:15 am
robeambro wrote:
Wed Apr 08, 2020 7:26 pm
What I don't understand is that Giant seem to not follow a coherent policy. IIRC, the new Defy had integrated cables. Now they launch a new TCR and it doesn't have integrated cables? I guess it would have made the bike too heavy, but still - quite a puzzling choice.
I assume they could save quite a bit of weight which might allow pros to fit 65mm wheels while still hitting 6,8kg or at least getting really close for certain stages.

Swapping 42s for 65s arguably has much bigger impact on aerodynamics than hidden cables or disc brakes for that matter.
Arguably it's difficult to find things that have *lesser* of an impact than cables!! Especially on modern disc / wireless / whathaveyou bikes with neatly "guided" cables. For 99% of consumers it's purely an aesthetic thing.

And yes, probably a stem allowing ICR would beef up weight by 50/100g + some other weight to be added to the frame itself. Which would surely be minuscule and equally unimportant to actual performance, but it would make marketing the bike quite more difficult (it wouldn't be lighter than ie the Tarmac, it wouldn't be more aero.. It would just have integrated cables)
Cables don't present much frontal/surface area but they're usually one of the least aerodynamic shapes on a bike and interact with clean air, so they have a definite impact far beyond their scale.

It may only be 1-2 aero watt at Xkm/h, but people will spendnfar more money on things that save far less
S6 Evo
S5 Aero

robeambro
Posts: 1829
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2018 6:21 pm

by robeambro

hannawald wrote:
Thu Apr 09, 2020 1:14 pm
robeambro wrote:
Thu Apr 09, 2020 11:36 am
scapewalker wrote:
Thu Apr 09, 2020 10:15 am
robeambro wrote:
Wed Apr 08, 2020 7:26 pm
What I don't understand is that Giant seem to not follow a coherent policy. IIRC, the new Defy had integrated cables. Now they launch a new TCR and it doesn't have integrated cables? I guess it would have made the bike too heavy, but still - quite a puzzling choice.
I assume they could save quite a bit of weight which might allow pros to fit 65mm wheels while still hitting 6,8kg or at least getting really close for certain stages.

Swapping 42s for 65s arguably has much bigger impact on aerodynamics than hidden cables or disc brakes for that matter.
Arguably it's difficult to find things that have *lesser* of an impact than cables!! Especially on modern disc / wireless / whathaveyou bikes with neatly "guided" cables. For 99% of consumers it's purely an aesthetic thing.

And yes, probably a stem allowing ICR would beef up weight by 50/100g + some other weight to be added to the frame itself. Which would surely be minuscule and equally unimportant to actual performance, but it would make marketing the bike quite more difficult (it wouldn't be lighter than ie the Tarmac, it wouldn't be more aero.. It would just have integrated cables)
My Cannondale Supersix EVO has internal cable routing and my Farsports F1 bar are slightly more than 300g. So there is a way how to make it light. Surprised Giant has not found a way how to do it properly.
There surely is a way to make a light cockpit, but you then have to also rework the frame to allow for cables, adding weight there. The unique selling point of the bike is lighter weight vs competitors. Currently they can claim their (frame) weight saving vs other similar bikes is an "impressive" three digits (ie around 100g). If you shave that by making the head tube suitable for internal cable routing, then your unique selling point disappears and you're just selling a bike like any other.
Last edited by robeambro on Thu Apr 09, 2020 3:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.

robeambro
Posts: 1829
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2018 6:21 pm

by robeambro

Pierre86 wrote:
Thu Apr 09, 2020 2:25 pm

Cables don't present much frontal/surface area but they're usually one of the least aerodynamic shapes on a bike and interact with clean air, so they have a definite impact far beyond their scale.

It may only be 1-2 aero watt at Xkm/h, but people will spendnfar more money on things that save far less
Well yes, that's why I said that for 99% of consumers it's just aesthetics. Whilst on this board there may be plenty of hardcore racers (who may well be interested in 2w at 45km/h, which is probably what the rough benefit is at..), the vast majority of people out there who purchase a road bike are not.

That said, even if somebody were to race crits (which is probably where internal cables would make the most difference), most possibly they would be better off choosing other bikes rather than the TCR, so I can definitely see why Giant would not care. It's just puzzling to then have internal cables on the Defy, which is probably a bit more marketed at leisure/endurance long and slow riding rather than pure racing.

Reno
Posts: 37
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2019 7:00 am

by Reno

Shpox wrote:
Thu Apr 09, 2020 11:43 am
I have been patiently waiting for this moment for long ass time, holding off on selling my Propel.

If they do the GVA colours or some kind of Gold like Peak Torque's build, I'm in and the decision for Rim vs. Disc will go onto Disc for the better clearance. I will most likely build it from the frame up with Ultegra Di2 but with Dura Ace Rotors.

The only bug bears are ISP (yes we all know but it's no surprise) and I am not a fan of the routing for the cables. I don't really mind exposed cables but how they are routing into the Downtube is a bit messy for mine...

Other than this, it's the bike I've been waiting to get on. While my Propel is no doubt faster, it does not climb well (I was amazed at the TCR alst year) and not a go anywhere bike. I feel beat-up after 30kms on that frame where the TCR I will ride all day.

Also looking forward to Disc - 50-60mm Lightbicycle wheels and 25-28mm tyres on this bad boy. The only thing that would sweeten this is 9200 as it will either mean buying 9100 at a steal or getting nice improvements in 9200.

I'm glad COVID won't delay the frame too much because I was starting to think this would run into next year.
GranFondo first impression was that new TCR is not especially comfortable.

hannawald
Posts: 1706
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2016 7:28 pm
Location: Czech Republic

by hannawald

Tarmac SL6 is almost outgoing model, I would be surprised if they make SL7 with exposed cables. Willier Zero SLR managed hidden cables as well and it is a similar bike to TCR. Giant is the one who markets its aero properties so it is them who are shooting to its own legs leaving exposed cables. To me it seems that they were not able to find neat solution probably to OD2..it is not so easy for them to adapt some FSA solution for example..We will see in the future how Canyon solves it.

RedbullFiXX
Posts: 234
Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2017 6:13 am

by RedbullFiXX

hannawald wrote:
Thu Apr 09, 2020 4:18 pm
Tarmac SL6 is almost outgoing model, I would be surprised if they make SL7 with exposed cables. Willier Zero SLR managed hidden cables as well and it is a similar bike to TCR. Giant is the one who markets its aero properties so it is them who are shooting to its own legs leaving exposed cables. To me it seems that they were not able to find neat solution probably to OD2..it is not so easy for them to adapt some FSA solution for example..We will see in the future how Canyon solves it.
Nice design except external brake hose on fork, that just looks cheesy :noidea:
Cyclocross, in general, is about riding the wrong bike for the conditions.

LiquidCooled
Posts: 218
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2017 5:46 am

by LiquidCooled

RedbullFiXX wrote:Nice design except external brake hose on fork, that just looks cheesy :noidea:
The 2021 design routes the brake hose inside the fork (it enters at the top and exits near the caliper). The previous generation had the external brake hose on the fork.
2017 Giant TCR Advanced Pro 0 Disc
2003 Cannondale R1000 (CAAD7)

LiquidCooled
Posts: 218
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2017 5:46 am

by LiquidCooled

Reno wrote:GranFondo first impression was that new TCR is not especially comfortable.
CyclingTips and Velonews say the opposite.
2017 Giant TCR Advanced Pro 0 Disc
2003 Cannondale R1000 (CAAD7)

by Weenie


Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓    Broad Selection ✓    Worldwide Delivery ✓

www.starbike.com



guadzilla
Posts: 273
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 6:55 pm

by guadzilla

robeambro wrote:
Thu Apr 09, 2020 3:08 pm
That said, even if somebody were to race crits (which is probably where internal cables would make the most difference), most possibly they would be better off choosing other bikes rather than the TCR, so I can definitely see why Giant would not care. It's just puzzling to then have internal cables on the Defy, which is probably a bit more marketed at leisure/endurance long and slow riding rather than pure racing.
For a crit, saving a few hundred grams would matter, I'd say - if i am constantly accelerating/decelerating, getting that extra mass up to speed takes more energy than the miniscule aero difference of the cables, especially when i am likely in someone's draft most of the time anyway.

Post Reply