Seraph Bikes Superlight 836g X68 - Alternative to SL8 Fakes?

[patliean1]

The assumption to justify part of Specialized's SL8 pricing is that the higher grade carbon they use is stronger, stiffer, while also being lighter than something like T800. And there's consideration to the carbon layout to provide a responsive yet agreeable riding experience.

I would be satisfied with this X68 if at the very least it wasn't a noodle overall to ride. I'm just not sure how TanTan would achieve a decent level of stiffness at the advertised weight and price point. The frame weight similar to the real SL8 Pro.

If TanTan can come even 70% close to the SL8 in terms of riding dynamics (stiff head tube, compliant seat stays and BB, fantastic crosswind stability) then it's probably a solid value. On paper.

[glepore]

Yes, exactly. I’d actually be happier if it wasn’t overly stiff in a 49. I think one area where the dollars get spent is in different layups for different sizes. I m 60 kg and 5 5 so my concern is probably the opposite of yours and both are valid. But I wasn’t buying a 6k bike anytime soon anyway.

[dovh]

Soo you wouldn't suggest getting this frame for a heavier rider, i asked tantan on instagram and they respondend that the weight limit is 130kg but i assume thats a default answer for everything I'm personally at 98-100kg range so could it be a `noodle` as patliean1 decsribes it?

[WWcyclist]

Soo you wouldn't suggest getting this frame for a heavier rider, i asked tantan on instagram and they respondend that the weight limit is 130kg but i assume thats a default answer for everything I'm personally at 98-100kg range so could it be a `noodle` as patliean1 decsribes it?

I don't think anyone here can answer that question for you since most are lighter and patliean1's comment is supposition.

If Tantan told you that then you should be fine,  I don't think they would just make up a number. If you are concerned you should tell them your weight and ask if it will flex a lot or remain stiff.

My boss is 275lbs and rides a carbon (orbea) frame with no issues

[Serge_K]

The assumption to justify part of Specialized's SL8 pricing is that the higher grade carbon they use is stronger, stiffer, while also being lighter than something like T800.

Where is the claim the sworks is stronger? afaik, it's the opposite, it's more fragile. there are plenty of photos of sworks from pros snapped in half, pinarello used to make a super light version of a frame that dealers refused to sell to clients because they snapped like matches, which is no issue if you're a pro, but not sustainable as a bike shop selling to normal riders. And the highest grades of carbon fibers are the most brittle. It's why historically the high modulus version of frames are more fragile: they push the envelope on how much fiber to use, but also, the portion of fiber that's high modulus / super fancy itself is much more fragile / brittle. There are also countless stories of people cracking their sworks frame in the trunk of the car, whereas i've never heard that with frames for mere mortals.
I understand that T700 is still the backbone of frames & wheels because without it, components would snap too easy. But it's not advertised because it sounds ghetto.
Which in turn means that the difference in materials cost between a 5000$ frame and a 300$ one is not on 100% of the fibers, but much less than that (assuming a good chunk is still T700/T800).

Caveat: i've never hold a sheet of pre preg in my life, & idk what i'm talking about.

[glepore]

No,  agree its not just the materials. Its also in the additional handling and complication of a more detailed layup. More pieces or different fiber and orientation. And also a premium markup. How much to attribute to each factor is highly secretive for obvious reasons.

[patliean1]

I definitely need to do a deep dive research on carbon fiber and educate myself better...

https://www.instagram.com/p/DBkmr8loXYn/?img_index=1

TanTan shows a size 52 matte black weighing 836g. My Tarmac L8 Pro in a size 56 weighs 827g. Now let's say a size 56 TanTan x68 comes in at 900g for comparison sake. How are they able to produce a comparable weight with less fragile (ie: stronger) carbon? And at a $600 price point? Is the difference between a $600 frame versus $3500 all in the marketing, engineering, tooling, staff, and frame size-specific layup?

ICAN's FL1 frame (Aethos lookalike) comes in at 783g unpainted in a size 54. No aero design details so less carbon needed, but obviously the Chinese brands are capable of making lightweight frames. My Winspace SLC3 weighs 829g. I'm just curious why we don't see more of these brands offering deep sub-1000g frames. Most of them seem to fall between 1050g to 1200g.

In the past I've said my theory as to why Chinese frames are heavier is because it's a built-in insurance policy by making the frames, in theory, more robust. But why would they need to do this if an 836g frame is strong enough without cutting corners?

Obviously I like what TanTan is doing by offering such a wide variety of frames across different disciplines. So I'm not trying to scare anyone away from this particular frame. I really want one myself. My curiosity lies in TanTan's ability to offer this frame at such stellar specs and price as a reputable factory. With minimal compromise.

[jonathanf2]

My SPcycle R088 in size 52cm comes in at less weight at 760g with no metal hardware and about 790g with UDH and FD hanger. Only difference between the R088 and TT-X68 is the lack of the beefier aero-sniffer head tube and they actually added an FD hole for mechanical cabling. SPcycle looks like they opted for their own off-the-shelf fork to accommodate 32c tires. With my climbing wheelset, I've gotten my R088 build down to 6.87kg (cheap 45mm depth aero wheels 7.2kg) and that's without going full weight weenie. I still have lots areas to cut weight on my build and I'm basically running cheap parts (ER9 groupset, Riro crankset, Magene PM, Xpedo pedals). Bike rides fine and I'm packing a ton of holiday winter weight. Plus my riding includes mostly urban climbing, sh**ty roads, yelling at cars, hopping on sidewalks and pot hole ridden descents.

[glepore]

I

ICAN's FL1 frame (Aethos lookalike) comes in at 783g unpainted in a size 54. No aero design details so less carbon needed, but obviously the Chinese brands are capable of making lightweight frames. My Winspace SLC3 weighs 829g. I'm just curious why we don't see more of these brands offering deep sub-1000g frames. Most of them seem to fall between 1050g to 1200g.

In the past I've said my theory as to why Chinese frames are heavier is because it's a built-in insurance policy by making the frames, in theory, more robust. But why would they need to do this if an 836g frame is strong enough without cutting corners?

Manufacturing technique, largely. One of the benefits of EPS is that its precision results in both a better finish with greater compaction, but also it follows that the precision allows for the end product to have less need for a "safety factor" through overbuilding. The minor weight differences between an actual SL8 and the bikes under discussion are likely down to minor details and even the resin used, along with the fact that all weights are quoted as +/- (tantan says +/- 40g for both frame and fork, so up to 80g variance).

[nis240sxt]

Should it be a surprise that these manufacturers are able to offer these replica frames at such a low price? We do know that the industry in Xiamen is tight knit. People move from factory to factory so intellectual property can leak, people can be bribed, etc.. If they have the cad files and layup schedule of a particular frameset, I don't think it would be that difficult to offer such as you see now. All that upcharge the big brands levy is to recoup all the sunk costs into research, design and marketing. Those that offer these framesets incur hardly much of that.

I have one of these replicas (not seraph) and I couldn't believe how good they are. I'm 190lbs and have beat the sh*t out of it with zero issues. It's currently cold as heck here but as soon as it warms up, me and my buddy with a real S-works both size 52 will do a test ride. Unfortunately, parts are not identical but I wouldn't be surprised if the ride is very similar.

[momento]

I am really interested in purchasing one of these frames.
I will choose the raw finish in size 52.

Considerations:
The raw TAN TAN frame weighs 140 grams more than the original Specialized frame of the same size, and I actually like this.
What I don’t like is the fork, where the TAN TAN component is even 30 grams lighter than the Specialized one.
I would like to ask TAN TAN to confirm the weight.

As for the rest, I am not surprised at all that there is a parallel production of a frame from such a famous brand.
If they managed to acquire the molds, they probably also obtained the entire process for positioning the carbon patches—how much to use and where to place them (perhaps with lower quality materials, but still effective).

What really amazes me is the blatant way in which such an obvious copy is being advertised.

[Serge_K]

What I don’t like is the fork, where the TAN TAN component is even 30 grams lighter than the Specialized one.

If they managed to acquire the molds, they probably also obtained the entire process for positioning the carbon patches—how much to use and where to place them (perhaps with lower quality materials, but still effective).

What really amazes me is the blatant way in which such an obvious copy is being advertised.

on the fork, the only thing that comes to mind is Spec product recalls on steerer tubes snapping. So, potentially, they now ask their factories to make walls thicker than market standard?

on layup techniques. I wouldnt buy a clone assuming the layup and / or materials are the same. However, i would assume that factories that OEM for brands (aka, ~ all of them, afaik), learn. You can call it copy, i would say learn. Philosophically, learning is a form of copying. Let's not go there. So, when i buy an open mould from a factory that makes frames for a brand (for eg, when i bought my 268 from Long Teng that makes frames for Argon 18), the LOGICAL thing for them to do is to somehow apply what they learnt in layup techniques working for brands, to the other frames they make.
I learnt math, then applied math at work. I had to do math for a client and refined my math. Then when i get home and have to do math for my own use, i dont suddenly start using beans to count, i still do math. Now replace this with layup, as i dont think you can patent layups, and even if you can, it's impossible to prove that the brand layup would have been "stolen".

And so, as times passes, good factories should be making increasingly good open mould, OEM, and clone frames.

On blatant copies, if it doesnt have a Spec logo on it, if it's not advertised as a spec, either in writing or pictures, then it's arguably not "blatant" that it's a rip off. Legally speaking, showing a logo that's not yours is a no no. But a frame shape? You'd have a lawyer up, and is the speed sniffer a patented design, or just a common sense design? What if something is different by 1mm, does it make it enough to claim it's different? And so on.

China's been playing a game of cat and mouse since the west started having stuff manufactured there. And in a way, it's "just" learning. A telling example of that is the downfall of gopro and the rise of digi drones & insta360 cameras. gopro absolutely failed at both, and both digi & insta360 are chinese brands that now lead the categories with their products, innovation and so on.

And re. bikes, it's the chinese factories that know how to do a layup. The west sends them requests for stiffness, compliance, shapes and so on, but china knows how to layup a frame, not the west, because the people doing the actual layup are chinese. With, ofc, the exception of 3 factories in Europe & the US, but there's an exception to every rule.

[momento]

That OEM factories master carbon processing—I agree.
Starting from the idea of offering a good product for $700, what should I do?

Start with elements that are already working and tested by others, minimizing the testing phase as much as possible.
Use raw materials that are not the latest generation (types of carbon and resins). And here’s my question:
Let me use random numbers to explain myself:
For example, Specialized’s SL8 project requires that the frame is composed of 280 pre-cut pieces of a specific shape, placed in a specific position, with a specific thickness, and using a specific type of carbon and resin (and all of this has to be recalculated for each frame size).

If an OEM factory uses different materials to reduce costs, the scheme (the 280 pre-cut pieces) created by the parent company would have to be revised. And this brings us back to the need for expensive tests and prototypes to achieve a good result with inferior materials.
Conclusions:
My reasoning would be:
I am an OEM manufacturer. If I want to create a GOOD product with that design aesthetic but using different materials—and I want to do as little testing and trial-and-error as possible—what do I do?

Example:

The Specialized frame in size 52 weighs 800 grams. I add 80–100 grams more material to mine and achieve the desired result.
The Specialized fork weighs 350 grams. I make mine weigh 380 grams.
Instead, seeing that the Tan Tan fork weighs 30 grams less worries me. I can’t explain it.

[glepore]

Of course the OEM's learn. That doesn't mean its economically viable to follow a layup schedule. Many of those tiny pieces are there for ride quality etc and aren't necessary to basic function, and the folks building these frames know enough to simplify. Again, who knows whether you can tell in the real world. EPS molding is an example of learning.

Totally agree that a very large part of the savings on these comes from the lack of need to recover sunk development costs. It also comes for having a direct to consumer model. Imagine what Canyon could do if they didn't have to develop anything-you'd have what many of the larger asian brands are doing.

As far as shapes go, no one needs to "steal a mold" - you can scan an actual bike. Then you're not "stealing" anything but the shape, which as pointed out isn't patented, although it may be ip protected in the west in other ways.

As far as fork weights go, the 30g being fretted about is within the tolerance quoted by tantan, and likely Specialized's number is conservative. I wouldn't worry about it.

[OlHag Cyclismo]

Finally received my frame, size 54 in matte black. Can't speak for quality as this is my first brand new disc build, but everything looks the par. I did notice the common fork and headset area gap, as well as a slight gap on the top side, between the spacers and headset.

I'll be posting my build list with weights once the bike is built up, should be pretty close to 6.9kg.