There’s no XL. 
Thoughts?
3 Likes
As time-trial courses have become more technical and demanding, it’s important to capitalize on years of R&D and pro rider feedback to create the fastest time trial bike—for all courses. From technical inner-city prologues, to rolling courses with steep grades, it’s not just about making the fastest bike for a straight line. With this in mind we’ve cut the weight and greatly increased the handling characteristics of the Shiv TT with an all-new silhouette.
- Interesting claim about “steep grades” since there is no front derailleur and the cassette is a 10-28. Not exactly what I would consider wide range. But maybe it’s fine for the few pros and crazies that can afford this beast.
- It does look like there’s provision for a front derailleur, so that could be added for those that need a small ring.
Otherwise, it looks like a ripper. I do find it interesting there is such a large gap behind the lower seat tube and lack a tire hugging shape that is common on other TT/Tri bikes (including the prior S-Works).
1 Like
It would be cheaper for me to seek out draft-legal events or add clip-on aerobars instead (specifically Aquabike events in my case).
What I would like to see is an aero\gravel bike which can fit 32’s, something more affordable than 3T Exploro, for events like these:
https://epicraces.com/events/ugly-dog-tri-michigans-original-gravel-road-tri/
Edit 1: Added note about clip-on aerobars.
Edit 2: Added note on Ugly Dog Tri
1 Like
- The new 2020 Roubaix almost fits that bill. It’s an endurance bike with clearance for 33’s. Might not be enough depending on the particular tire choice, but it’s about the closest I can think of that offers:
- decent aero (on par with the current Tarmac),
- wide tire comparability (for road/all-road more than real “gravel”),
- has a number of price points,
- includes the FutureShock 2.0 for more control.
2 Likes
Seems like dropped seat stays are all the rage now. I’m wondering if the primary reason they’re doing this is to reduce surface area on the back end.
I also think it’s cool that it actually comes with a disc wheel.
1 Like
- Yes, less vertical surface area is more aero. The somewhat longer horizontal section (when compared to similar designs) may also allow some deflection to improve ride quality (speculation on my part, but possible considering the loading direction, cross-sectional properties, and moment arm length).
- It’s another area of convergence to a common solution that is about the best solution for a given problem/goal.
Not so with the new Shiv, it instead has a small profile seat tube with a big gap between it and the rear wheel, the Roval 321 disc wheel. This new wheel is key to the Shiv, Specialized saying that the wheel doesn’t need to draft the seat tube which has allowed the seat tube to shrink in size.
- Looks like the gap is very intentional. I guess that people will likely have a disc in most cases, but it makes me wonder about performance in the event that someone runs a deep dish instead of a full disc.
I think a 50/28 should be fine for most grades on a TT course. I run 1x 58T 11-32 and it’s fine up to 5-6%, and 7-8% is ok, but not ideal, if I really push it.
1 Like
My previous gen ShivTT is an XL and the stack/reach are about the same as the L in the new one, so I don’t think they really lost much.
2 Likes
I wanted to do a full geo comparison because I was wondering the same thing with the article comments about adding reach.
Edit to add geo comparison for all sizes (note, there is no XL even on the older model):
Hmm. Seems like the whole bike is designed around making the disc brake version comparable to Shiv TT we’ve had for like a decade. The old rim brakes are pretty crappy, but most TT’s at my level are still of the old non-technical variety. I only brake for the turnarounds haha.
This is one for the pros only IMO.
I think the Wheelbase (with the associated Front Center and Chainstay length) change are notable. Even the slight BB drop change adds to the alterations in handling.
True, it might not matter to every TT rider on basic courses, but for anyone choosing a new TT bike as of now, I would strongly consider this attribute in the set of options. There are still needs to handle well in the unexpected situations that happen from time to time, and a more agile and predictable bike would be welcome to me, especially in a less than ideal handling situation of riding in aero position.
Yeah. I should disclose I’m an owner of a 2013 Shiv TT 
1 Like
I want to buy one; hell I will even start doing TT’s simply to justify it !
I think it looks amazing
1 Like
I’m curious to see if/when this design, and the similar one on the top level Tri version will trickle down into a “consumer” level bike for TT and/or Tri.
These 2 new bikes are great, but far from satisfy the need for an affordable option like the current and aging Shiv Tri (decades old non-disc bike). Seems like it could happen in the lead up to this years IronMan, but that may be a stretch. It could be another year entirely for any trickle-down.
And perhaps, the sales are low enough on that (and the parallel Trek SpeedConcept) that is just as old) that there is not enough justification to update those models?
1 Like
Adding on the thoughts about the seat tube gap and disc wheel combo…
- I could see someone making a fairing that bolts to the FD mount holes, and fills the gap to the wheel/tire that may improve the aero for people that my run a regular wheel (non-disc).
- Could be done as a light, non-structural design with minimal weight. Even a rapid prototype or hand-made composite with relative ease.
I wonder if it will trickle down to a “consumer” level like you said. Specialized never did that for the TT version of the pervious Shiv, only the tri one which isnt UCI legal. So I imagine they won’t for this one either.
1 Like
Right. But as the two designs are so similar, I am hoping they follow suit with other builders (like Trek & Canyon) in making a bike that actually meets UCI road requirements and has Tri options (like wider bars, forks and such).
Essentially making one bike suit both needs (with little or no modification), seems like an option to share cost and make it more profitable overall.
I’d like to see that as well but I think Specialized wanted to make the fastest tri bike they could, and then the fastest UCI legal TT bike they could without sacrificing on either side. Not sure if they will do a cheaper UCI legal one but its something that puts people who don’t tri in a tough spot. I love Specialized bikes, and have thought the Shiv is a super cool looking bike in the past. This one has a few things that has me scratching my head. Then again at 14k, even with a team discount put its well outta range for something that I get to race 3-5 times a year.
2 Likes