HiBoost

Sorry to hear that man... Best of luck in the job search!

HiBoost

Just a couple things to add for anyone looking at the SLX... contrary to what several internet posts claim, Canyon USA will *not* let you swap the cockpit for a different size after the purchase. They will only sell you a different one for $400 :/

As well, the Assualt LE wheels will *not* be sold separately, I spoke with Reynolds today and they confirmed that. They were rumored to be released "soon" but that doesn't seem to be the case.

My big issue is that the front-end comfort from the Endurace model seems to come primarily from the one piece cockpit. But if that's not going to fit me (I usually need a shorter stem than what bikes are spec'd with) then I could end up with a fairly harsh ride by endurance standards using a regular bar/stem (not to mention having far fewer choices due to the 1 1/4" steerer). Another thing on the cockpit, the "stem length" is measured from the steerer tube to where the bar flats are most rearward. This too is contrary to magazine reports that the swept back bars lead to a shorter and more relaxed position. Canyon told me the actual stem portion is longer than 110mm but the steerer to bar tops is 110 after the back sweep.

All combined this is pushing me off of the Canyon and towards doing a custom build... I just think I'm going to end up fighting too many of the specs to make it the good deal it would be if I could use the bike as-is (the 52/36 crank is another example of something I'd have to swap out right away)

socalscalatore

that's my exact beef with this bike too. If this had a 50/34 crank it'd be at the top of my list. The 52/36 is a deal breaker.

HiBoost

Honestly the 52/36 crank can be sold on ebay for $180-$200 and you can buy a new 50/34 for $210-$220, so you are only out like $50 after fees and some time... definitely shouldn't derail a $4k bike purchase on its own. But for me when I start considering cost to redo the cockpit as well, then it starts to muddy the waters quite a bit.

jitteringjr

socalscalatore

Does switching between 11-32 and 11-28 cassette require change to the chain length? Or can you use the same chain?

Also, at the risk of turning this into a gearing thread, which I apologize for. I'm on a 52/36 11-28 set up right now on my stock CAAD12. I do not need more gearing range, rather, I need my gears to be more usable. So with my CAAD12, I feel it's more usable if I change the crank to 50/34, as oppose to change the cassette to 11-32

socalscalatore

yes but that's bit a hassle to go through on a brand new bike, and I'm lazy

jitteringjr

Plainsman

Following because I'm almost ready to pull the trigger on the same bike. I've been following Canyon for awhile. I was a little surprised that they elected to put a 52/36 and a short cage derailleur on their endurance range bike. I guess I can get the mid compact - but seems like there would be little downside to giving a long cage di2 derailleur. That way you could run 11-28 and be pretty racey, or run in the 36 front and 34 rear combination, which would be idential gearing to the low end of a 50/34 with a 12-32 cassette. Seems like it would have been a slam dunk combo to me.

NTX_Cycler

The lack of flexibility within the cockpit of the SLX vs the SL is something I have considered. I'm fairly short (5'4"), but I will be getting a bike fitting when I order the bike. I'm hoping I can make enough adjustments elsewhere to fit within the parameters of the integrated cockpit.

I'll hopefully be getting competitive offers early next week. My GF said I should ask for a signing bonus as there will likely be no difference in compensation packages, but there will also not likely to be any wiggle room to adjust comp. If I get the signing bonus, the purchase of the bike will be back on. I need the bike sooner rather than later as I want to do the MS 150 next year and need to do training (currently riding my MTB as that is all I have).

BigPoser

I did the MS 150 this year. Killer event! We are looking to do it again next year as well.

Muyfa666

Any updates? Curious to see what you decide on. Am looking at a 2018 Endurace CF SL Disc 8.0 DI2 myself. :-)

Endurace

Hello All for those with Canyon's (Ultimate/Endurace) bikes....

I'm (relatively) new in here and wanted to see if anyone has the above.
I bought an Endurace CF/SLX 8 Di2 and loving it... I've also a Niner RLT9 aluminum
withe a SRAM Rival groupset and love that as well for it's versatility.

Anyhow, I'd be interested to read what others in here have and what they like/dislike
about your Canyon bike. Also was looking to see if anyone still has the reflector
mount that goes on the cockpit... no, i'm not using it for the reflector... looking for
another one to buy from someone in here to modify in order to take on my phone.

PM me if you still have one to sell. Canyon does not have a part number for it and
will not/cannot sell that separately.

Any comments will be appreciated.

Endurace

Canyon said the same to me when I wanted to swap for a wider cockpit and shorter stem. Had to buy a new one and looking to sell the one that came with it.

fastfour

Any updates here? Curious to see how things turned out a I'm shopping the same (SLX) bike.

Cyclist0108

I went through this exercise a few days ago, until the pessimistic naysayer/killjoy/wife vetoed it.

Briefly, I am 5'9.5" and their sizing tells me "small", so be very careful of their sizing. (The interface also screams that I cannot possibly have legs so defectively short; I can almost hear the German accent.)

They have a showroom near San Diego. It might be worth a trip for a sizing/test ride. Maybe you can drive home with one.

The SLX bike is fundamentally different in geometry and gearing. I decided I would be better off with the SL. Don't let anyone talk you out of the Di2.

Campag4life

I don't get Canyon's endurance geometry. 73.5 deg sta across the board.
Size large they target for 6' and taller riders has a 568mm top tube. Really? Wow is that short reach...and relatively short stack for endurance geo.

Be careful about picking a frame size as wgscott suggests. I basically couldn't ride this bike comfortably.

Sy Reene

You did notice that above Large, they do also have XL and 2XL bike sizes?

Campag4life

Of course Sy. I am the guy on here that gives people advice about their fit.
Its weird to go from 568mm to 592mm top tube length when jumping from L to XL.
I don't like Canyon's geo for this bike. I like Canyon bikes. I believe they are well executed. I ride with a couple of guys that have them...aero and non aero version.
Just not my cup of tea on fit.

Sy Reene

Is that an odd jump in size? Basically it's 24mm or about 1". If each successive size bike is generally to fit someone 2" larger on average than the prior, the bike size is splitting the difference (ie. top half of body length), plus maybe accommodating greater likelihood that taller people have longer arms?

Campag4life

Yes, as I said earlier 'its odd'.
How about a homework assignment? How about you go out on the web and find any name brand bike where the top tube changes more than 19mm from frame size to frame size? Not 24mm as in the case of the Canyon but less than 20mm.

I would be curious to see what you come up with.

Sy Reene

Ok, but what does this mean, and why is 1" TT difference not appropriate for a rider 2" taller? I'm genuinely curious on the theory of this stuff.

Most bike companies seem to add about 1/2". Then again, Canyon is trying to offer a lineup that they indicate can work for someone up to 6'8" which by itself is a bit unusual, so perhaps their gaps above a certain size grow a bit. Bike sizes are always averages. Unless you go custom you're always going to be sacrificing one direction or the other. The problem I have with Canyon is that there's the big headache about just getting a different stem length/bar width.

Turn the question around.. here's Jamis' race bike geo.. By what logic is there only a 5mm reach difference between their 58 and 61 sized bikes? What fitting logic is being applied here?

vtje

For what it worth, I live in a fairly hilly area and my new Cervelo R3 came with 52/36 and I love it WAY better than 50/34 on my old bike (same cassette size). Almost non-noticable difference on climbs, but a significant improvement on higher speeds. Also find myself shifting less front chainring.

Campag4life

Sy,
Good point on Canyon trying to pander to outlier tall people and therefore they spread out their sizing a bit to preclude one more carbon mold which would bring geometry in closer frame to frame in sizing. I just haven't seen it before and of course doesn't address those that maybe caught in 'no man's land'. I am also not a fan of 73.5 deg sta and prefer a more common 73.0 deg common sta like say Cervelo uses...but this works best for me and those with shorter femurs maybe prefer a more upright seat tube.
Much of preference is personal bias of course, what we like and or feel we need in geometry.

You asked about reach. Keep in mind, that stack and reach are 'constructs' of math or geometry. They are conventions used to keep score on fit.
Stack has a bit more relevance as a 'stand alone' metric. It pretty much dictates the height of the handlebar with a given standard spacer stack and/or stem rise.

But reach is more complex. If you look industry wide, reach doesn't vary much frame to frame compared to stack. Why is that you may wonder as you asked? Its because of how we as humans are statistically built. Most and far from all derive their height in their leg length. I am a notable example of that. When I sit at the table with average height guys of say 5'10", I am eye to eye with them. Or on an airplane or in a car. But I am 6'1". My height is in my legs. I have a cycling inseam of 35.25".

Why does this matter? Because stack is the analog of leg length...I need pretty abundant stack therefore to preclude big bar drop because of my leg length but, I need pretty average reach. How does that manifest in frame geometry? Reach doesn't change statistically much frame to frame size for most manufacturers but stack changes many times on the order of 20mm or so frame to frame size.

Its probably still not perfectly clear and for good reason. You may still wonder about reach like many do. Why doesn't it change much frame to frame size even though many may derive most of their height in their legs and torso lengths tend to be more common.

Its because of the math. Reach is a 'function of' stack. You may wonder why is it top tube can change 20mm from frame to frame size but reach only changes 4mm. Why is that? Its because Reach is a function of Stack. What does that mean? Simply Reach is measured from the height of frame at the head tube. When Reach is measured on a shorter head tube bike with std. fork length, the Reach will be shorter because the Reach measurement is taken from a lower point and the headtube of the bike is not straight up and down...a typical head tube angle is 73 deg or so and therefore have a 'sine' component of horizontal reach.
A mathematical trig identity comes into play which is the predicate for the complementary relationship between sine and cosine in mathematics: cosine^2 + sine^2 = 1 This is trigonometry identity derived by adherence to the Pythagoras theorm who lived 2500 years ago.

A while back I wanted to better understand the relationship between Stack and Reach and so derived it for a bike I own, a 58cm Roubaix. The trig isn't too bad but leans heavily on a trig identity known as the 'law of sines' which many who took Geometry in school don't remember...a bit more obscure trig identity than many some recall.

Consider Stack as pretty much a stand alone metric. But not Reach. Reach is a function of Stack, so you solve for Stack first. Point is, the height of the headtube affects Reach. This is why frames don't vary as much frame to frame size in Reach as you may expect when top tube length changes by 15-19mm or so frame to frame size for many manufacturers. Its because Reach is measured...from a shorter or taller vantage point depending on head tube height which doesn't rise vertically straight but on a rearward leaning angle. Its this further diminishing angle by the head tube tipping rearward that diminishes reach on a taller frameset which coincidently works with how we humans are generally constructed, most are standard size but with shorter or longer legs (and arms).

Math below if interested:

Pizzaiolo Americano