2016 Giant ToughRoad SLR2
#551
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Martinsburg WV Area
Posts: 1,704
Bikes: State 4130 Custom, Giant Trance 29
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 422 Post(s)
Liked 183 Times
in
123 Posts
Nice. Congrats. The Toughroad SLR1 is my dream adventure touring bike. I was bummed to hear they discontinued the flatbar version here in the US. Only the SLR 2 and rumor is that next year it will be gone too. I may just have to cross the border into Canada to nab one this spring. Enjoy your next 14,000!
Oh, wait...your talking about the SLR1...oops....never mind. that bike is gone.
#552
Member
Doesn't look like Giant Discontinued this: GIANT FLATBAR TOUGHROAD SLR
Oh, wait...your talking about the SLR1...oops....never mind. that bike is gone.
Oh, wait...your talking about the SLR1...oops....never mind. that bike is gone.
Likes For BikeTall:
#553
Senior Member
[QUOTE=BikeTall;21272921]yeah. I can always nab the Slr 2 add racks and upgrade the components, but i really dig the color on the slr 1. And from what i hear the slr 2 will be gone next year in the US, it seems that in America at least the drop bar version sells better. But i prefer the flat bar. So does the rest of the world as the slr1 & slr 2 sell better overseas. Oh well. I was thinking of starting my tour on my flat bar giant escape across the US...and then when i fly overseas buying the Toughroad slr1 there. Sounds like a plan.[/QUOT]
I have the 2016 SLR1 and you don't miss much. I thad a 2x10 SRAM drivetrain, which I replaced with 1x11 anyway, so could have gotten the SLR 2 anyway.
some people said they replaced the SLR 1 racks (no idea if they are bad, but apparently not great)
I have the 2016 SLR1 and you don't miss much. I thad a 2x10 SRAM drivetrain, which I replaced with 1x11 anyway, so could have gotten the SLR 2 anyway.
some people said they replaced the SLR 1 racks (no idea if they are bad, but apparently not great)
#554
Member
[QUOTE=HerrKaLeun;21273424]
Actually that is a possibility. I would probably replace the back rack anyway since I already have a topeak rack that a pack slides into which i like. So the SLR2 actually makes more sense to me. I know it sounds petty, but I do prefer the cool copper color of the 2020 SLR 1 tho.
yeah. I can always nab the Slr 2 add racks and upgrade the components, but i really dig the color on the slr 1. And from what i hear the slr 2 will be gone next year in the US, it seems that in America at least the drop bar version sells better. But i prefer the flat bar. So does the rest of the world as the slr1 & slr 2 sell better overseas. Oh well. I was thinking of starting my tour on my flat bar giant escape across the US...and then when i fly overseas buying the Toughroad slr1 there. Sounds like a plan.[/QUOT]
I have the 2016 SLR1 and you don't miss much. I thad a 2x10 SRAM drivetrain, which I replaced with 1x11 anyway, so could have gotten the SLR 2 anyway.
some people said they replaced the SLR 1 racks (no idea if they are bad, but apparently not great)
I have the 2016 SLR1 and you don't miss much. I thad a 2x10 SRAM drivetrain, which I replaced with 1x11 anyway, so could have gotten the SLR 2 anyway.
some people said they replaced the SLR 1 racks (no idea if they are bad, but apparently not great)
Actually that is a possibility. I would probably replace the back rack anyway since I already have a topeak rack that a pack slides into which i like. So the SLR2 actually makes more sense to me. I know it sounds petty, but I do prefer the cool copper color of the 2020 SLR 1 tho.
#555
Senior Member
[QUOTE=BikeTall;21273437]
Actually that is a possibility. I would probably replace the back rack anyway since I already have a topeak rack that a pack slides into which i like. So the SLR2 actually makes more sense to me. I know it sounds petty, but I do prefer the cool copper color of the 2020 SLR 1 tho.
to me, the blacker or grayer the better. Timeless design. In 5 years black still will be black, but whatever neon green or orange or other Walmart bike color they come up with will look odd. I also have a triangle bag, so that is prominent anyway.
Actually that is a possibility. I would probably replace the back rack anyway since I already have a topeak rack that a pack slides into which i like. So the SLR2 actually makes more sense to me. I know it sounds petty, but I do prefer the cool copper color of the 2020 SLR 1 tho.
Likes For HerrKaLeun:
#556
Member
True. I don’t mind getting the SLR2 and black/grey looks good. The copper colored 2020 slr1 tho is pretty sweet. Not gawdy. I think it would age just as well as the black/grey. But it’s all good.
#557
Junior Member
Join Date: Nov 2019
Location: Derby, United Kingdom
Posts: 16
Bikes: Jamis Quest
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I am looking at this as an alternative to a drop barred gravel bike. I come from a road bike back ground but have not yet dipped my toes into the world of disc brakes. Are discs as easy to look after as rims and I hear that discs often rub and can be difficulty to align properly. Is this a common occurrence with discs or is this a bit of a myth? Or do I just need to man up and go for it
#559
Junior Member
Join Date: Nov 2019
Location: Derby, United Kingdom
Posts: 16
Bikes: Jamis Quest
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
in the UK we have a similar bike but in drop bar called the pinnacle Arkose which can take 700x45 tyres with mudguards and this is currently £650 but this has Thru axles and I could modify to flat bars if I ever felt the need.
do you think the toughroad will go for thru axles next year?
#560
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Northern Shenandoah Valley
Posts: 4,142
Bikes: More bikes than riders
Mentioned: 36 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1446 Post(s)
Liked 764 Times
in
571 Posts
There are pros and cons to disc brakes, but they're quickly gaining traction (pardon the pun) to pretty much supplant rim brakes in most applications. One of the biggest drawbacks to them is the additional structure needed (in the fork, for example) to withstand the intense braking forces at the hub. Disc brakes have essentially made extinct older style thin-blade forks (that deliver excellent ride quality). The outward appearance of this (stronger forks) is a fork that appears to have thicker blades and straighter legs. Ride quality suffers if nothing else changes...other design strategies can be used, such as suspension forks or large volume tires to try to get that ride compliance back.
Thru axles should probably become the standard for disc brake bikes. Trek has a proprietary system (of course they do!) called "Thru-Skew" or something like that. It's sort of a hybrid of QR and TA, and will probably be supported by nobody other than Trek (making you use specific hubs, forks, etc.). But there are definite drawbacks with QR and disc brakes. The safety-related one is pretty easily avoided with proper installation (braking forces can eject a front wheel from a QR fork if the skewer isn't tightened properly and securely), but the dimensional drawback (sensitivity to EXACT alignment between caliper and disc) is not so easily avoided with QR. I have three disc brake bikes, and I can't reliably re-install a wheel without having to make a small caliper alignment adjustment afterward. Sometimes I can, and sometimes I can't. There seems to be too much "tolerance" in how a QR wheel/hub can go back into the frame to get this relationship perfect every time. I always have a multi-tool with me, and I will usually need it if I need to remove a wheel (such as when transporting the bike in a fork mount type arrangement).
Discs aren't perfect (no brake system is), but I generally prefer them for most of my bikes.
Thru axles should probably become the standard for disc brake bikes. Trek has a proprietary system (of course they do!) called "Thru-Skew" or something like that. It's sort of a hybrid of QR and TA, and will probably be supported by nobody other than Trek (making you use specific hubs, forks, etc.). But there are definite drawbacks with QR and disc brakes. The safety-related one is pretty easily avoided with proper installation (braking forces can eject a front wheel from a QR fork if the skewer isn't tightened properly and securely), but the dimensional drawback (sensitivity to EXACT alignment between caliper and disc) is not so easily avoided with QR. I have three disc brake bikes, and I can't reliably re-install a wheel without having to make a small caliper alignment adjustment afterward. Sometimes I can, and sometimes I can't. There seems to be too much "tolerance" in how a QR wheel/hub can go back into the frame to get this relationship perfect every time. I always have a multi-tool with me, and I will usually need it if I need to remove a wheel (such as when transporting the bike in a fork mount type arrangement).
Discs aren't perfect (no brake system is), but I generally prefer them for most of my bikes.
#561
Junior Member
Join Date: Nov 2019
Location: Derby, United Kingdom
Posts: 16
Bikes: Jamis Quest
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
There are pros and cons to disc brakes, but they're quickly gaining traction (pardon the pun) to pretty much supplant rim brakes in most applications. One of the biggest drawbacks to them is the additional structure needed (in the fork, for example) to withstand the intense braking forces at the hub. Disc brakes have essentially made extinct older style thin-blade forks (that deliver excellent ride quality). The outward appearance of this (stronger forks) is a fork that appears to have thicker blades and straighter legs. Ride quality suffers if nothing else changes...other design strategies can be used, such as suspension forks or large volume tires to try to get that ride compliance back.
Thru axles should probably become the standard for disc brake bikes. Trek has a proprietary system (of course they do!) called "Thru-Skew" or something like that. It's sort of a hybrid of QR and TA, and will probably be supported by nobody other than Trek (making you use specific hubs, forks, etc.). But there are definite drawbacks with QR and disc brakes. The safety-related one is pretty easily avoided with proper installation (braking forces can eject a front wheel from a QR fork if the skewer isn't tightened properly and securely), but the dimensional drawback (sensitivity to EXACT alignment between caliper and disc) is not so easily avoided with QR. I have three disc brake bikes, and I can't reliably re-install a wheel without having to make a small caliper alignment adjustment afterward. Sometimes I can, and sometimes I can't. There seems to be too much "tolerance" in how a QR wheel/hub can go back into the frame to get this relationship perfect every time. I always have a multi-tool with me, and I will usually need it if I need to remove a wheel (such as when transporting the bike in a fork mount type arrangement).
Discs aren't perfect (no brake system is), but I generally prefer them for most of my bikes.
Thru axles should probably become the standard for disc brake bikes. Trek has a proprietary system (of course they do!) called "Thru-Skew" or something like that. It's sort of a hybrid of QR and TA, and will probably be supported by nobody other than Trek (making you use specific hubs, forks, etc.). But there are definite drawbacks with QR and disc brakes. The safety-related one is pretty easily avoided with proper installation (braking forces can eject a front wheel from a QR fork if the skewer isn't tightened properly and securely), but the dimensional drawback (sensitivity to EXACT alignment between caliper and disc) is not so easily avoided with QR. I have three disc brake bikes, and I can't reliably re-install a wheel without having to make a small caliper alignment adjustment afterward. Sometimes I can, and sometimes I can't. There seems to be too much "tolerance" in how a QR wheel/hub can go back into the frame to get this relationship perfect every time. I always have a multi-tool with me, and I will usually need it if I need to remove a wheel (such as when transporting the bike in a fork mount type arrangement).
Discs aren't perfect (no brake system is), but I generally prefer them for most of my bikes.
Comfort is also a big think for me would you say the ability to run larger tyres outweighs the harshness gained from beefier forks?
The toughroad seems a perfect bike for me but I may leave it until next year to see if Thru axles are added I also don’t like the idea of using the D-fuse seatpost as I like to have a large setback as I use a brooks saddle.
#562
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Northern Shenandoah Valley
Posts: 4,142
Bikes: More bikes than riders
Mentioned: 36 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1446 Post(s)
Liked 764 Times
in
571 Posts
Regarding the comfort aspect, I hesitated to note it because there are so many variables in bike design and execution that influence comfort, and I don't mean to imply that disc brakes themselves ruin frame comfort. And "comfort" is such a subjective topic anyway.
By "comfort", I mean only that the older bike frame designs that many of us have enjoyed over the years don't support disc brakes without strengthening of certain aspects of the frame. The thin bike frames of yore, that often delivered a very nice ride quality, often don't work well with disc brakes because of the forces involved. Forks and seat or chain stays must be reinforced or designed to be heavier/thicker/stronger/etc. Modern materials like carbon (as in the case of the ToughRoad's fork) help to mitigate this to some degree. Carbon can be designed to have a lot of strength in one axis and a lot of compliance in another axis. But it has drawbacks as well (it seems that cost and realized durability are two of the most prominent).
Larger volume tires can certainly mitigate the harshness of a stiffer frame, but the feel will still be different. And it's absolutely not that one is better or worse than the other. Most folks will tend to prefer the feel of either a modern aluminum bike or a more traditional steel bike. Both offer advantages and disadvantages. I prefer older steel bikes for ride quality and "feel" of the bike. I prefer hydraulic disc brakes for the smooth and consistent braking action, regardless of moisture level or mud/sand/grit. Historically, those two things that I prefer haven't been found in one bike (though that is changing). Steel bikes with disc brakes are often built pretty heavy (adventure riding, like Surly bikes). Hybrid bikes with discs (like many of us have on this board) typically have aluminum frames. My dream bike is my '97 Trek 750, but with disc brakes (as long as it rode the same). That'd be the ideal bike for me. Some modern bikes are close to that. I understand the Breezer Radar bike has a relatively compliant frame and ride quality to it. Perhaps the Jamis Coda does as well (but it uses narrower tires).
The great thing is there are so many options. The unfortunate thing is there are so many options -- where do you even begin?! I'm a huge fan of test-riding a bike before buying it, especially if you know yourself to be very particular about what you like and don't like.
By "comfort", I mean only that the older bike frame designs that many of us have enjoyed over the years don't support disc brakes without strengthening of certain aspects of the frame. The thin bike frames of yore, that often delivered a very nice ride quality, often don't work well with disc brakes because of the forces involved. Forks and seat or chain stays must be reinforced or designed to be heavier/thicker/stronger/etc. Modern materials like carbon (as in the case of the ToughRoad's fork) help to mitigate this to some degree. Carbon can be designed to have a lot of strength in one axis and a lot of compliance in another axis. But it has drawbacks as well (it seems that cost and realized durability are two of the most prominent).
Larger volume tires can certainly mitigate the harshness of a stiffer frame, but the feel will still be different. And it's absolutely not that one is better or worse than the other. Most folks will tend to prefer the feel of either a modern aluminum bike or a more traditional steel bike. Both offer advantages and disadvantages. I prefer older steel bikes for ride quality and "feel" of the bike. I prefer hydraulic disc brakes for the smooth and consistent braking action, regardless of moisture level or mud/sand/grit. Historically, those two things that I prefer haven't been found in one bike (though that is changing). Steel bikes with disc brakes are often built pretty heavy (adventure riding, like Surly bikes). Hybrid bikes with discs (like many of us have on this board) typically have aluminum frames. My dream bike is my '97 Trek 750, but with disc brakes (as long as it rode the same). That'd be the ideal bike for me. Some modern bikes are close to that. I understand the Breezer Radar bike has a relatively compliant frame and ride quality to it. Perhaps the Jamis Coda does as well (but it uses narrower tires).
The great thing is there are so many options. The unfortunate thing is there are so many options -- where do you even begin?! I'm a huge fan of test-riding a bike before buying it, especially if you know yourself to be very particular about what you like and don't like.
#563
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: North Central Wisconsin
Posts: 4,668
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3032 Post(s)
Liked 1,198 Times
in
781 Posts
Yes i have seen that seems to be the case, the toughroad slr2 2019 is in stock close to me for £600 which seems a good deal so I was thinking of biting the bullet on something low maintenance. It just seems that the industry is now going for thru axles with discs and this model still has QR.
in the UK we have a similar bike but in drop bar called the pinnacle Arkose which can take 700x45 tyres with mudguards and this is currently £650 but this has Thru axles and I could modify to flat bars if I ever felt the need.
do you think the toughroad will go for thru axles next year?
in the UK we have a similar bike but in drop bar called the pinnacle Arkose which can take 700x45 tyres with mudguards and this is currently £650 but this has Thru axles and I could modify to flat bars if I ever felt the need.
do you think the toughroad will go for thru axles next year?
#564
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: North Central Wisconsin
Posts: 4,668
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3032 Post(s)
Liked 1,198 Times
in
781 Posts
Thanks for the detailed response, I think this is one of the reasons why I have not yet transitioned to discs. I like the simplicity of rim brakes as I am not the best when it comes to tinkering but aligning a wheel with rim brakes is so simple.
Comfort is also a big think for me would you say the ability to run larger tyres outweighs the harshness gained from beefier forks?
The toughroad seems a perfect bike for me but I may leave it until next year to see if Thru axles are added I also don’t like the idea of using the D-fuse seatpost as I like to have a large setback as I use a brooks saddle.
Comfort is also a big think for me would you say the ability to run larger tyres outweighs the harshness gained from beefier forks?
The toughroad seems a perfect bike for me but I may leave it until next year to see if Thru axles are added I also don’t like the idea of using the D-fuse seatpost as I like to have a large setback as I use a brooks saddle.
As far as comfort...the bigger tires and carbon fork help with that.
D-fuse seat post is one of the best ideas to come along in a while I think. The seat is perfectly aligned every time.
#565
Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Texas/Maine
Posts: 51
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Just checking in on my ol’ thread, wonder how many still have their Toughroad ? Still have both of mine...
#566
Member
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 44
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 16 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
#567
Member
#568
aka Phil Jungels
#569
Newbie
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 18
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Last year, the wife and I caught a ferry over to France with our bikes, and cycled along the Loire for two weeks. Pretty magical to be honest. Its a very popular route for touring holidays with well signposted cycle specific paths for the most part, however some of it was rougher gravel and I thought the bigger volume tyres of the Toughroad made it a better choice than a typical touring bike with 'normal' 700c tyres. Good times.
SLR1 touring somewhere in France!
#571
Member
Digging up the old Toughroad thread. 20,380 miles and I had this happen:
I was told to go to the dealer, they want to check it out for the Lifetime Warranty. I’ll be heading there today. We’ll see how things go!
ETA: I have to admit, there’s a side of me that wants to clean up the area, TIG it and hit it with clear coat, and wear the scar!
I was told to go to the dealer, they want to check it out for the Lifetime Warranty. I’ll be heading there today. We’ll see how things go!
ETA: I have to admit, there’s a side of me that wants to clean up the area, TIG it and hit it with clear coat, and wear the scar!
Last edited by Henny; 08-10-21 at 04:57 AM.
#574
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Martinsburg WV Area
Posts: 1,704
Bikes: State 4130 Custom, Giant Trance 29
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 422 Post(s)
Liked 183 Times
in
123 Posts
Over 20k miles in 5 years is impressive. I will be even more impressed if Giant warrants this and provides a replacement frame.
Not so certain that Giant had this kind of usage in mind when selling this bike in the U.S.
Not so certain that Giant had this kind of usage in mind when selling this bike in the U.S.