TanTan/Seraph TT-X69 - the 2026 edition

[Sakizashi]

I really appreciate your insight @Sakizashi thanks. And others in here too. It's part of what makes this forum great.

My engineering and technical contribution is literally zero. I can only speak on: "Hey this bike rides good!" 

Companies do their best to mask their questionable practices from influencers. As well as up until they take the customer's money. What I've noticed is their true colors always appear when YouTubers make public critique. The companies either accept accountability to do better or berate said YouTubers via email. I've had both happen to me.

I think your contributions to this community are huge. You've raised awareness of many lower priced options, and I do believe that your reviews can be a big boon to some of these companies. I look at XMCS. This forum and WW seem like a big part of their growth story. Not sure they have the same story without you. The same is probably true of TanTan who enjoyed a boost to their reputation in part due to your review of the GR201. Now, its also fair to say that the GR201 was also a good product. We should lament that, as a seller, Tan Tan has chosen to go down the path of the X68 and other clones rather than reselling higher-quality frames like the GR201.

One thing that gets too much weight here is whether or not X company is a manufacturer. The reality is that middlemen can be helpful if they are well placed enough to give you access to better manufacturing and can provide you with leverage to get things done that you otherwise couldn't. It should not be an inherent knock if a company is primarily a trading company with some small production of its own. I *think* there are some companies that we regard as manufacturers that do layup design, make molds, and then hand off the carbon production to another party. Are they truly manufacturers? Do you think we should care?

The answer to both questions is no. Is a middleman that gives you access to CarbonKing products less good than a smaller manufacturer? There are pros and cons to both, as a consumer or a small business navigating them. Put another way we give someone a relatively small amount of money and get back a product on the basis of trust. The motivations that back that trust are aligned with your own under different circumstances. If you want a high-quality product at the lowest price, go direct. If you want a high-quality product that doesn't exist or extensive customization, the additional leverage gained by using a middleman might be worth it if you are only spending a few thousand USD.

That is why I look at the bigger picture and return to the idea of trust. The amount of trust/$ spent on Tan Tan seems very low compared to XMCS, Zen, DFS, and LTK. Not to mention Carbonda / Flybike, who have been in the game long enough and with products performing well enough that the price of the Quick Pro frames seems warranted. After all, we are at the point where the forum regularly compares them to counterfeit sellers like Yoho and Rk.

[stepahin]

Correct. It kind of rides like a Tarmac SL8 in terms of how it interacts with it's environment. Meaning crosswind stability and when at speed. It's literally the same shape and design. I said this in my video. Both frames are essentially identical in these specific regards.

That's pretty much where the similarities end for me personally now that I have several hundreds of miles in. It's nowhere as stiff and nimble as the real SL8. I've swapped in at least 3-4 different wheelsets, dialed in my bike fit, and put the bike through my usual daily workouts/efforts. I even swapped to a different cockpit. From the EXS Aerover (known not to be stiff) to Peter's XMCS's cockpit. How it interacts with the rider is a different experience than an SL8. So unfortunately that 20%-30% delta from a genuine Tarmac mostly all comes in its lack of comparable stiffness, nimbleness, and power transfer. It's more comfortable than an SL8 because it isn't as stiff. Nevermind about the fit and finish...

I've been purposely quiet in here about speaking on the X68. And TanTan as a whole. Trying not to be cryptic or passive aggressive. I'm not exactly happy with everything surrounding my dealings for the company. It's a story for another time. But I will at least say that the extreme variation in rider experience among several customers highlights that perhaps the build quality from TanTan on this particular frame offering is very inconsistent frame to frame.

It's rare that I feel worse about a frameset over time. The only frame I've felt this way about was, you guessed it, the TanTan X38 (Scott Foil clone). I cant figure out how TanTan can make such a BANGER for a GR201 gravel frame and be questionable at best in their road offerings.

Oh man. You should add this comment to your YouTube video. People watch it and think, wow, I'll buy an almost-tarmac for pennies! Personally, two people sent me this video. So, your opinion might push someone toward the disappointment you just described. Well, it's up to you of course, but what you wrote above is literally the opposite of what you talk about in the video, it's not "80% of SL8", but its "it looks like SL8 but nothing more". Peace.

[casper.f]

^so tired of these stupid comparisons. Anyway, that's a very flat fork crown for an "aero" bike

That's a fair critique of the fork crown. I can see why you'd be tired of constant comparisons.

My intention for bringing up the Willier was simply because the 48-hour release window seemed like an interesting tidbit, especially when we have so little else to discuss. Is it a crucial piece of information? Probably not, but I felt it was worth adding to this thread.

After all, since we're working with just a handful of photos, speculation is all we have. I think it is part of the joy in this forum.