# New Build - 2016 S-Works Epic 29 Di2



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

As I move to this new build, I'm selling off much of my 2015 S-Works Stumpjumper build (frame, fork, etc), so feel free to peruse the usual bike sites if you are interested in buying any of the bits. Unfortunately I didn't ride the 2015 as much as I wanted, so it is still mint.

I found a great deal on a complete 2016 Epic, so this isn't a full "build" thread per se, but more of a _tear-down-some-stuff-and-bolt-on-stuff-I-like _thread.

This is just a placeholder for now, but I'll start posting as much as I can in the coming weeks.


----------



## Seb K (Apr 21, 2009)

Can't wait dude  !!!


----------



## scant (Jan 5, 2004)

looking forward to seeing this 

do you prefer the feel of the epic shock? if you can handle a normal stock (I love the new single can fox dps shock), then you'd loose a big chunk of weight changing from the epics "2" shocks, to a single stock shock.


----------



## machine4321 (Jun 3, 2011)

In for the ride!!


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

scant said:


> looking forward to seeing this
> 
> do you prefer the feel of the epic shock? if you can handle a normal stock (I love the new single can fox dps shock), then you'd loose a big chunk of weight changing from the epics "2" shocks, to a single stock shock.


I don't have much saddle time on this yet, so hard to know how I feel about it. Always takes me quite a bit of time to set it up anyway - I'm pretty picky. I was running hardtails for the last several years so haven't had an Epic since 2011, so it feels overly "cushy" at the moment, which is probably an odd thing to hear.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*Start at the End*

Happy New Year!

Sorry for the delay - might as well get started on the "build", although this will be in reverse from previous ones - you'll see what I mean in future posts.

I found a good deal on a 2016 S-Works Epic 29, so bought it fairly quickly, so I scrambled to move some parts to the new bike. As a result I didn't weigh the stock, new bike - doh! However, I'll eventually deduce the stock weight of the bike by going backwards, and I hope this proves helpful to some of you.

So, going in reverse, here is the final setup of the bike:








_*Final bike, 21.01 lbs / 9.53 kg*
_








_*Scale shot - just couldn't get that .01 lb to disappear - would be nice to see an even 21 lbs. That said, that last digit is likely a joke, calibration-wise.*_

The final bike has my MCFK bits moved over (bar, stem, saddle), and the SWAT components removed - much more on that later. This isn't necessarily an accurate race setup, but is the lightest rideable configuration for me on a "normal", fun ride with friends. (I'd be using a pack for these long, group rides.)


Up next:

Why the hell did you buy a new bike? You just built one idiot! 
More details on the parts swapped out. 
More details on the parts put on. 
More info on what's included with SWAT, and the weights. 
More detail on the XTR crank. 
More detail on the stock Di2 setup on this bike, and why I changed it.


----------



## Crossmaxx (Dec 2, 2008)

Happy New Year!

Sweet ride  To get that final 0,01 lbs lost, have you thought about scoring a pair of Hope Race 160 mm rotors at 79-80 grams each? You seem to be rocking Magura Storm SLs at around 92-95 grams each?


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

Good eyes! Yes those are Storm SLs, 160mm front and rear. They're my go-to when I'm out of ideas. Good suggestion re the Hope Race - I certainly could give them a try.

Finding solid, yet light rotors has been a challenge:
I tried the Kettle carbons at one point via the Kickstarter, and well, we all know how they worked. (Hint: Did not work.)

Briefly used Carver Titanium rotors, and someone warned me they'd be noisy, and holy crap they scream. If I could solve that, they'd be sweet.

I then switched to the popular KCNC Razors. They're decently light, and inexpensive, but I found they lacked a bit of grab. They're fine, but the cutouts might be a bit too aggressive.

In the meantime, I've been tracking these to see if they'll actually work:
Zelvy

...and we've found out that carbon Alphas will explode:


----------



## Crossmaxx (Dec 2, 2008)

I agree that finding a rotor that is both light, durable and offers good braking performance is really difficult. I, too, was burned by the Kettle fiasco, so I've learnt my lesson and won't be an early adopter of any new company claiming to have come up with some new hyper efficient composite for rotor applications. That's why I'm suggesting to go with Hope. But don't wait for too long, I recall reading somewhere that Hope has seized production of their "Race" rotors (which are slightly thinner, and thereby lighter by approx. 10 g/each).


----------



## WR304 (Jul 9, 2004)

phlegm said:


> I don't have much saddle time on this yet, so hard to know how I feel about it. Always takes me quite a bit of time to set it up anyway - I'm pretty picky. I was running hardtails for the last several years so haven't had an Epic since 2011, so it feels overly "cushy" at the moment, which is probably an odd thing to hear.


Nice bike.

When it comes to the rear shock the 2016 Epic needs a higher pressure in the rear shock than the older Epics did. I think my 2016 Epic Expert has something like 80 or 90psi pressure more than I used on my 2012 Epic's rear shock! Using the same rear shock pressure settings on the 2016 as on the 2012 left the back of the bike feeling mushy and too soft.

Is your seatpost a secure fit in the frame? On my 2016 Epic it was out of spec and I had all sorts of problems trying to stop the seatpost slipping down in the seat tube to begin with. It's sorted now but took a double seatpost clamp, lots of carbon paste, thread locker and a bit of electrical tape as a shim to make it stay in place.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

Thx for the comment. I remember reading your post WR, about the seatpost slipping.

If you look at the specs page for the bike, you'll still see a "31.6 mm" seat binder listed, instead of the typical 31.8. I was wondering if somehow they employed a custom, smaller size to account for that problem.

However, my bike shipped with a standard 31.8, and in my limited riding it hasn't slipped yet, with just normal assembly paste used.

I suspect it's probably just a typo, because there are more on that page:


There's no such thing as a "torque tube" on the rear hub, as that's unique to the RS-1 setup on the front
The bike runs an XTR cassette, so wouldn't have the XD driver body it claims
Heaven forbid the details on one of their flagship bikes be accurate.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*Saddle Swap*

I'll start to go backwards now, showing some of the part removal, and we'll keep building back to the OEM weight.

First off, I swapped out and sold the saddle. The stock is the S-Works Phenom, with carbon rails, @149g









Saddles are a very personal/fit thing by definition, so once I find a good one I hang onto it. In this case I'm sticking with my MCFK that I've had for a while. It fits, and has just the right amount of flex. It happens to be nicely light too @70g:









So, I know the stock setup on the bike is *+79g* so far, and I'll keep a running total.


----------



## mattkock (Mar 19, 2009)

I Love this bike. Makes me want to do another WW build to top my 13.91lb. Niner.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

mattkock said:


> I Love this bike. Makes me want to do another WW build to top my 13.91lb. Niner.


You have some amazing bikes man - would love to see a new build thread from you.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*Seatpost*

Next up is the seatpost. Again, absolutely nothing wrong with the S-Works carbon post, I just kept my existing MCFK - and it was already attached to my saddle. [LAZY]

The post itself, which might be uncut, measures ~ 42cm, and comes out to 143g:
















_The seatpost has a perfectly smooth lower section, so it was either cut professionally (and sanded perfectly), or it is untouched from the factory._

The saddle mounting is done via the same system that Specialized has used for years, and this carbon rail-specific setup weighs 58g:









... so that makes the whole seatpost assembly 201g.

My existing MCFK post and mounting hardware comes to 106g for 35cm:









This amounts to -95g on the seatpost assembly, and adding that to the -76g from the saddle we have a running total of *-171g* from the stock bike.

Note: I'm doing a running total from the stock bike weight, but the perceptive of you will notice that the S-Works post was 42cm long, while the MCFK is 35cm in length. There's no debate that shortening the stock post would reduce the weight a bit, and be more of an apple-to-apples comparison.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*Grips*

A quick one here: grips.

Stock grips are "Specialized Sip Grip, light lock-on, half-waffle, XL thickness" (Could they make the name any longer?), and surprisingly beefy @ 104g:









And some quick and easy weight savings from the ESI Racers' Edge @ 46g (including endcaps):








_Photo courtesy of re-bike.de._

This is a further savings of 58g, which is great for grips alone. Running total is now *-229g* from stock.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*Bar & Stem*

For the bar, it's the same story as before - I'm fine with my setup, so I simply moved it to the new bike.

The outgoing bar, S-Works 8-degree backsweep, 6-degree upsweep, 10mm rise, 720mm, 31.8mm, was cut down to ~670mm:









...and came in @ 196g:









and my MCFKs, at an admittedly narrow 630mm, come to 119g:









Next up is the stock stem, an S-Works, 6 degree, in 100mm which is 126g with all the hardware:









and my - take a guess - MCFK stem (80mm) coming in at 76g (with all hardware on it):









So, from the stock setup, we've dropped 77g on the bar, and 50g on the stem, for a total of -127g on these components.

The running total is now *-356g* (almost 3/4 lbs) thus far.


----------



## RS VR6 (Mar 29, 2007)

That stem...so hottt...


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

RS VR6 said:


> That stem...so hottt...


Thanks RS. It's too expensive for me to really recommend, but has worked without issue for a few seasons now.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*Cranks*

The stock setup on this Di2-based bike is an XTR crankset, and dual chainrings. Di2 really shines when those 2 rings can be controlled via a single shifter up front, so the setup makes sense. However, in my case, the terrain, and my legs are more than fine with 1X11, so that's what I'm retaining. There's certainly some weight shedding to be had as a result.

Before anyone says it, I'd agree that using Di2 on a 1X setup is a bit of a waste. Again, controlling 2 rings, and that extra range with a single shifter is the real draw, however the crisp Di2 shifts are still awesome to have regardless.

Anyway, here's the stock XTR cranks (175mm) and dual rings (36/26T) @ 623g:









And I'll keep using my older S-Works (Lighting) carbon cranks, which have that nice removable spider @ 373g:








_Note the lockring is included, behind the cranks._

...and Wolftooth 32T ring weighing 71g (claimed):








_Don't have a scale shot, so I'm trusting claimed weight here._

...and RaceFace crankboots (17g), which I wish the previous owner had used on the XTR cranks to retain more of my resale value:









So that totals 461g, giving a savings over stock XTR setup of 162g.

For those counting - probably just me - total weight from stock bike thus far is *-518g*.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*Di2 Front Derailleur*

Quick one here. As eluded to in an earlier post, I'm running a single chainring, so no need for the front derailleur.

Just a pure removal here from the stock bike, weighing 138g with mounting bits:









This brings the running total weight to *-656g*. (Just under 1.5 lbs so far.)


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*Rotors*

Just to recap, in case you're wondering what the hell I'm doing, I bought a new (used) bike, but forgot to weigh it with stock setup when it first arrived. I tore it down, and swapped in some parts pretty quickly.

So I'm counting backwards from my final 21.01 lbs to see what the original bike weighed. Hopefully some of the itemized weights are of interest to you, and I'm finding it interesting how much you can still save weight-wise from a fairly light OEM bike to begin with.

Next up are the rotors, and the stock ones are Shimano Icetech (finless). Website says 160mm front and rear, however sometimes the L and XL-sized bikes will ship with a larger front. So, here's the original rear, 160mm @ 99g:









..and front 180mm @ 117g:









As you'd expect, running a 180mm rotor up front requires an adapter and long-ish bolts, and those added 31g:









Finally there's the mounting bolts and Shimano-specific tabs which are 12g per side, totaling 24g:









So that's a total of 271g for rotors on the stock bike.

At present, I'm running a pair of Magura Storm SL rotors, as I'm fine with a 160mm up front given my weight, terrain, and general slowness. 

These are not incredibly light, but they work solidly and quietly so I'm fine. I've used KCNC in the past, and they are lighter and inexpensive, but a bit less grabby IMO, and I was getting squeal that I couldn't resolve.

I am avoiding another mistake with carbon brake rotors, and you can read further here:
http://forums.mtbr.com/brake-time/carbon-brake-rotors-823378.html

I am also no longer using my Carver Titanium rotors as they squeal like a bastard, and you just can't fix that. It's a shame though as they were light (107g for a PAIR of 160mm), and worked very well:









So, back to the Maguras, they are 97g each for 160mm, and 12 Ti bolts are 14g (unpictured):








_Photo courtesy of Pro Bike Supply._

That makes 208g with this setup, shedding 63g from OEM rotors.

That brings my running total weight from stock to *-719g* / *-1.59lbs* .

If anyone has decent ideas on rotors, let me know. Some interesting things in development, so we'll see.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*Cassette*

Another quick one here.

Dropping the stock M9000 XTR cassette which weighed 327g:









and replacing with an XO1 @ 265g:









which gives a quick 62g savings.

Of course there's the outgoing Shimano setup for the hub which is 49g:









...and incoming XD driver, savings another 10g @ 39g:









All together that's 72g more savings on the cassette.

Running total is now *-791g / -1.74 lbs* below the stock setup.


----------



## briscoelab (Oct 27, 2006)

The Shimano 160mm rotors are barely heavier than the Storm SL and work much better, in my usage. I think the 97 vs 99 gram weight difference is well worth it. You can run Ti bolts with the shimano rotors, just as you can with any. 

Looking god though!


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

briscoelab said:


> The Shimano 160mm rotors are barely heavier than the Storm SL and work much better, in my usage. I think the 97 vs 99 gram weight difference is well worth it. You can run Ti bolts with the shimano rotors, just as you can with any.


Yep, good point on that. There's a lot more "meat" on the Shimano rotors just by looking, so I'd have to guess better bite (and heat resistance) too. The only other difference are those 3 tabs per rotor (on the scale shot with the Shimano bolts), but they weigh "zero" on my scale.

Only problem is that there's a 160mm and a 180mm so couldn't use both without the adapter.

I'm going to keep looking for something interesting though in the rotor department.



briscoelab said:


> Looking god though!


I know it's a typo, but I think that's accurate.


----------



## egebhardt (Nov 16, 2004)

Very good work. Nice numbers too. 
I come up with *22.75 lbs* for the original bike. Not bad but clearly you did better.


----------



## egebhardt (Nov 16, 2004)

Opps... Duplicate post. I can't find how to delete this one.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

egebhardt said:


> Very good work. Nice numbers too.
> I come up with *22.75 lbs* for the original bike. Not bad but clearly you did better.


Thanks for the kind comment.

Actually, there's still weight loss to go.


----------



## briscoelab (Oct 27, 2006)

You could just pick up another 160mm and ditch the adapter, but I understand if you already have the other rotors. 

I'm running the M9000 race on my Epic WC as well. Nice brakes. I really wish I could use the RT99 center lock rotors, those are even nicer. We've got them on 4 set of cyclocross wheels in our house. But, alas... center lock only and I'm running the Roval wheels.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*More Di2 Stuff (Actually, less Di2 Stuff)*

This post will be a bit longer, but hopefully of interest to those running Di2, or just curious. I've already removed the Di2 front derailleur, as I'm running a 1X setup.

If you checked out my previous build:
http://forums.mtbr.com/weight-weenies/new-build-2015-s-works-stumpjumper-ht-xtr-di2-992587.html

...you'll see that I managed to get a "stealth" Di2 setup in place. By that I mean no display, and no extra cables visible from a "normal" bike. Since every Di2 build needs a smart hub of some sort (either the display, or a 3/5 port junction), I hid a 3-port junction (SM-EW90-A) in the bottom bracket area of the previous frame:








_A modified SM-EW90-A will just fit in the largest hole, top left._

The part was initially just a few mm too tall to fit, so I started by sanding off the 2 top tabs which are used for strap mounting to the frame exterior (circled), but eventually had to sand the entire "hump" off the junction, to the red line shown:








This gives you a streamlined, but unfortunately partially open junction box. Yes, that's electrical tape. Yes, you can see rough sanding marks on some of the plastic. Not ideal, but the device was pretty well protected from water ingress:















_Sanding down a Shimano Di2 hub will void your warranty kids!_

This allowed the box to slide into the frame opening, and be completely hidden. The only drawback, and actually a pretty minor one, is that I needed to open the bottom door (one screw) if I wanted to check on the battery status. Not ideal, but given a recharge was only required once every couple of months, it was no biggie.

Now to the current frame, the 2016 Epic. This FSR doesn't have the same room under the bottom bracket area, so there's no way even a modified smart junction would fit:








_You can see the Di2 tube on the left, and rear brake hose on the right for scale. Not much room in the under-BB area for much more than cables._

Thankfully I could make use of the clean solution that Specialized did when allowing for a front Di2 derailleur:








_FYI, the black, metal piece on the top left is part of the FD mount. It can be removed, but exposes a shiny, metal portion of the frame, so I've kept it on._

Here you can see an unmodified SM-EW90-A junction,  , and I'm running a single etube (Di2 wire) out of the frame, guided by this nice rubber piece Specialized provides to seal up the frame hole up top. You can see it is strapped to the frame as intended by Shimano.

This is not stealth so I'm a bit bummed, but it looks professional and isn't noticeable - with no extra wires aside from that short length to the junction:









There's also the advantage over the previous frame in that I can instantly see the battery status, as the junction is exposed. Charging is also easier, as there's no bottom bracket door to remove.

This brings us back to the ongoing weight loss from stock. Since I don't need the Di2 display, I can shed 30g:









and replace it with the junction (not sanded!) @ 9g:









So that's a smallish 21g savings, but there's still more to lose.

Running total weight from stock: *- 812g / -1.79 lbs*

Note 1: I used a "dumb" hub, the SM-JC41, inside the frame. It just connects 4 etubes, and does nothing else. It's tiny, 4g, so will fit in pretty much any frame. I believe the stock Di2 setup also made use of one of these, so I call it a wash.









Note 2: "Hey, what about the dummy plugs! The dummy plugs!!!". For reference, these fill unused ports, and look like this:









The stock build used 2 in the display, and I use 2 in the 3-port hub on the frame. Also a wash.


----------



## egebhardt (Nov 16, 2004)

scant said:


> do you prefer the feel of the epic shock? if you can handle a normal stock (I love the new single can fox dps shock), then you'd loose a big chunk of weight changing from the epics "2" shocks, to a single stock shock.


Since Specialized doesn't give much 'mount' space at the top-tube, you would have to cut the frame to fit a different shock. I'd love to have a regular shock in there but the 'Brain' is such a major selling point for Specialized.

I have had all the Brains since 2003-2006 (Fox Brain) to 2007-2009 (AFR Brain) to 2010-2013. They ALL have some form of jab up your back before releasing. It's just reality. The Brain can't actually see terrain so it has to take a hit before it moves. It's not ideal but the Fox iCD rear shocks aren't very common yet and the Fox iCD is wildly expensive. I think the Fox iCD is the future.


----------



## egebhardt (Nov 16, 2004)

I don't see a battery. I'm assuming it is the SM-BTR2 cylinder in the seatpost. That may be what allows you to not require the SC-M9050 display as your Junction A (Junction A and B required). Junction B can be the JC41, obviously. 

I am using the computer chip from inside an SM-BMR1/2 which forces me to use the SC-M9050 display. Shimano demands it. Then I buy cheap Ebay 7.4v LiPo batteries. 45g for an 800mAh 7.4v Lipo. The SM-BTR2 might be close to that.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

Yes, I'm running the BTR2 (battery) in the seatpost. This was also the OEM setup, so in terms of weight there is no difference, so I didn't include a reference to it in this thread. However, maybe I should post a mockup of the etube routes, and junctions.

I'm not familiar with the SM-BMR series, but the display is thankfully not required with my setup. Also didn't think the JC41 was mandatory, but never tested a setup without.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*Di2 Routing Details*

Got a couple of PMs saying "yes" to more Di2 detail, so here it is.

First, the wiring diagram. Four etubes connect to the internal 4-port JC41 junction (smaller, grey rectangle) in the bottom bracket compartment. The battery (longish, grey rectangle) sits in the seatpost, and one wire (yellow) exits to the 3-port junction strapped to the bottom of the seat tube. The other 2 external ports on that junction are sealed with dummy plugs. I could have used all 3 ports on the external junction, but that would have meant 3 exposed cables in that area, instead of just one.

Given the FSR frame, the etube to the rear derailleur (orange) follows the "lazy loop" under the bike, back into the chainstay, then out once more for the final connection:








_Sorry for the crappy MS Paint edits. The "battery" looks especially bad - I can't rotate it!_

The etubes are very thin and light, so won't curve nicely outside of the bike like a brake hose would. As such, I have the front shifter etube follow the brake hose by sealing them both in heatshrink:








_You can see I've also heatshrunk where the etube connects to the shifter, and covered the exposed etube portion as well. These wires are normally black, but the shrink I've used is grey-ish._

...and I then run that single heatshrunk line into the front frame opening in the downtube:









Here's a shot of the Di2 wire leaving the chainstay. I cover that exposed segment in heatshrink as well, for a bit more protection:








_Can you have too much heatshrink? I say no._

Another nuance are these anti-rattle bits that I hadn't seen before:
















They clip onto an etube to prevent them rattling in the frame. The thing is though, these Di2 etubes are very thin, and limp, almost like a wet noodle. If you have any excess length inside a frame, they just lie flat. This would be different from a relatively taught and rigid brake hose inside a frame, which can easily bang and rattle on the inside.

I tested my wiring by shaking the crap out of my wired frame and didn't hear anything, so I didn't use the clips. I don't even recall seeing these at retail, so maybe these are an OEM-specific item. I suspect the same effect can be had by using zip ties.

Hope that's useful. Next up is more weight savings from stock.


----------



## lRaphl (May 26, 2007)

I have the Ultegra Di2 on my road bike without those anti-rattle bits and the etube in my downtube is a bit too long. I can ear it rattling on rought road section. The carbon frame also serves to amplify the sound. But overall, I don't care about it anyway!


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

I had a similar setup on the previous build, and didn't notice any rattling. MTB use would be different noise-wise anyway though from road.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*Axles*

More weight loss from the axles.

Stock front, for the "predictive steering" hub is the Rockshox 15mm @ 75g:









and the stock rear axle is the hex-only Specialized (and DT Swiss partnership?) X-12 for a 142mm rear weighing 39g:









In this case I transfer over my two Extralite Black lock axles, the front is 27g:









...and the rear is still nicely lighter than the minimal Specialized one above, @ 29g:









That shaves another 58g in axles alone.

Running total from stock is now *- 870g / 1.92 lbs. *

Getting closer to removing 2 lbs, and we still have stuff to go!


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*Small, Misc Stuff*

Next up is the seat binder. First off is the stock Specialized which weighed 18g:









...which I replaced with the MCFK "Sub 5" binder, which could be called ">5", specifically 6g:









Unsure if you can tell from the photo, but it is truly just 2 slim bands of carbon. Initially I thought that there's no way it would hold, but it held up on my previous build without issue. That said, WR304 brought up in an earlier post that he had some issues with seatpost slip, so we'll see if this is enough.

Regardless, I can't really recommend the cost to save 12g.

Next small thing is the expander for the fork. Stock was the Specialized expander that they use on multiple forks, especially those with carbon steerers @ 24g:









...and the equivalent from MCFK @ 12g:









Again, not really worth it for most people to save 12g, so can't recommend it really.

In any event, total weight savings from these 2 swaps is 24g.

Running total weight from stock bike is *- 894g / 1.97 lbs*.

Still more to shed coming up!


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*Tires*

OK, this one's going to be a crapshoot.

For some reason manufacturers cannot make 2 tires weigh the same. They might have come off the same line right after each other, yet their exact weight will be a mystery until they hit a scale. Manufacturer claims on tires are notoriously incorrect, and typically incorrect on the low end, i.e. they often weigh more than claimed.

In this post, I'll compare the stock rubber, and see what weight I've shed, but there are some issues:

1. I only have the used tires, with some tread gone, and some sealant caked on the casings.
2. The new tires are already mounted, and have sealant added.

So, the only way I can compare is against manufacturer claims on both the outgoing, and new tires, which is a crapshoot. However, it should at least give a rough idea of any weight loss from the OEM spec bike.

Outgoing tires are:

S-Works Fast Trak, 120TPI, 2Bliss Ready, folding bead, 29x2.2" (front)
S-Works Fast Trak, 120TPI, 2Bliss Ready, folding bead, 29x2.0" (rear)

Specialized claims they weight approximately 520 and 570g each, for a rough total of 1090g of rubber:








https://www.specialized.com/us/en/components/tires-tubes/sworks-fast-trak-2bliss-ready/105770

I'm running 29X2.1 Schwalbe Thunder Burt with Snakeskin front and rear. These are heavier than their "Liteskin" versions, but less risky:








https://www.schwalbe.com/en/offroad-reader/thunder-burt.html

Claim on these is 515g for 1030g of rubber, pretty close, so I have approximately saved 60g here, YMMV. I also realize that tire choice is highly track-dependent, so there are usually tradeoffs.

In any event, my running total weight change from stock bike is *- 954g / 2.1 lbs* - I have removed over 2 lbs from stock.

Next up: Controversy. Is the SWAT kit part of the bike weight?


----------



## trmn8er (Jun 9, 2011)

I say SWAT is part of bike weight since it comes that way. Nice build!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## machine4321 (Jun 3, 2011)

Selling those Fast tracks ?
I have a tire problem in my head lol


----------



## briscoelab (Oct 27, 2006)

I have some Fast Traks, lightly used.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

machine4321 said:


> Selling those Fast tracks ?
> I have a tire problem in my head lol


Yep, I'm selling everything that came off the stock bike.


----------



## DarioV (Nov 28, 2011)

Very nice :thumbsup:


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

DarioV said:


> Very nice :thumbsup:


Thx for the kind comment.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*Swat*

Next up I'll tackle the weight of the SWAT components. While these bits are technically attached to the bike, and contribute to its weight, you'd have to carry most of this with you somehow anyway, i.e. in a hip pack, saddle strap, hydropack, etc.

In any event, here's the breakdown of bits...

First off is the SWAT box, plastic, which attaches to the frame @ 87g:









Next up is the stock tube, which is a hefty 174g:









Here's the multitool weighing 61g:









... and the plastic shroud that the multitool fits into on the frame which adds 20g:









We'll add the chain tool that sits in the steerer and provides a top cap @ 31g:









Next is a non-stock Bontrager Air Rush inflator head, as I've lost the original, but the weight must be similar to this ~ 22g:









and a single stock plastic tire lever, where the scale fluctuated between 11 & 12g:









You'd also see a Specialized 25g CO2 cartridge in the default kit. I only have 16g versions, and couldn't find any weights online for the stock one. Here's a pic of a pair of Top Peak 25g cartridges (courtesy of r2bike.de) suggesting that a single cartridge is ~ 104g:









Specialized includes 2 bottle holders with the SWAT kit, so I'll weigh them here. Note they are mirror images of each other, 25g each:









and finally some bits to attach things to the frame, total of 11g (and there should be 2 bolts in the bottom pic, so double that one):
















The total is *572g / 1.3 lbs*.

Next up:


Extrapolate the stock weight of the complete bike. 
Can we do better - weight-wise - than the SWAT kit?


----------



## TiGeo (Jul 31, 2008)

I think that if you ride/race with the SWAT, you include it in the overall weight of your bike. It's like when folks don't include pedals. I get having a super-light stripped weight (but rideable) as well for fun..."My bike weight XXX and I can actually ride it that way." My extra bits add ~1 pound to my bike's overall weight including a bottle cage, bottle, bell, Garmin + mount, and underseat flat repair bits. 322.6g for my underseat strap with a tube (26" to save weight), single 16g CO2, inflator head, and tire lever...all you need for racing which is considerably lighter than the complete SWAT kit. I carry more in a small pouch in my jersey pocket for normal rides.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*Stock Weight*

I'm finally down to the main point of this thread, which was to figure out the stock weight of the 2016 S-Works Epic 29 Di2. Could have been easy if I had just remembered to weigh the friggin' bike when I first got it. 

So my *final weight, after several parts swaps is 21.01 lbs (9.53 kg)*. My various parts swaps shed 2.1 lbs (954g).

For the sake of correctness, I forgot to include my MCFK top cap and bolt, which was added along the way. (The cap is included with the SWAT chain tool that sits in the steerer, which I removed.) This adds a massive 5g (ha!):









So, the parts swaps actually shed 2.1 lbs, rounded, (949g).

This means the *core bike weighs 23.11 lbs (10.48 kg)*.

The SWAT components weigh 1.3 lbs (572g)

So the *weight-of-bike-on-the-LBS-floor-with-SWAT-bolted-on is 24.41 lbs* (11.1 kg).

When I started, I doubted that I'd be able to remove even 1 lb from the core bike, so to remove more than 2 total was surprising.


Next up: How efficient is SWAT, weight-wise?


----------



## TiGeo (Jul 31, 2008)

^^^I hate when I forget to just friggin' weigh things when I get them. I also think there is great info/data here. Its key to see a very high-end super light bike still weighs ~24 pounds and makes you appreciate what it takes to get a bike down even just a few pounds! If you are lighter than that, you are doing pretty good IMHO.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

Hey, thx for the comments TiGeo. You've always provided great input in this subforum, and others over the years. Cheers!


----------



## HyperSprite (Mar 14, 2014)

This has been a great read. Thanks for the time and effort.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

Thanks for the comment. To think, I could have avoided the whole thread simply by weighing the stock bike at first.


----------



## Seb K (Apr 21, 2009)

Remove the SWAT components and use a cage and tool bottle . At least you can remove the tool bottle and stil clait he bike weight with just the cage  !!! 

FYI I have finally attempted to bond the MCFK carbon stem to my TLO bar .Expensive and risky but it looks pretty good. Never bonded a bar and stem before but it took a bit of machining of the stem and I used kevlar twaron fabric which is stronger than carbon (adds around 2 grams though) . I won't post it because the usual trolls will respond but go check my G+ page dude . the bar and stem weigh 135grams all in .


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

Seb K said:


> Remove the SWAT components and use a cage and tool bottle . At least you can remove the tool bottle and stil clait he bike weight with just the cage  !!!
> 
> FYI I have finally attempted to bond the MCFK carbon stem to my TLO bar .Expensive and risky but it looks pretty good. Never bonded a bar and stem before but it took a bit of machining of the stem and I used kevlar twaron fabric which is stronger than carbon (adds around 2 grams though) . I won't post it because the usual trolls will respond but go check my G+ page dude . the bar and stem weigh 135grams all in .


That is crazy light!


----------



## Seb K (Apr 21, 2009)

I wish it would look better though . I had to sand it down after removing the wrap . It came out glossy but had quite a few imperfections . I ended up sanding the whole thing . 

I have put all my weight on the ends of the bar and it is incredibly strong bond . One other tip is to epoxy the bar directly onto the stem first before applying the fabric so you get additional strength (also allows easier application of the fabric.

I'll just post a quick pic here if you don't mind . If you want me to delete the pic I will :


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*Dartmoor Rotors*

Some minor updates to the build.

First up are the Dartomoor Rotors @ 85g & 83g for the 160mm size (claimed 85g, so spot on):

























Do they look familiar? The are similar to the Ashima Ai2, and here's why:









Outgoing are Magura Storm SLs, both @ 94g:









I don't have any ride time on them yet, and to be honest I'm a bit skeptical because I've found the KCNC Razor and Ai2 a bit lacking.

Loss of a massive 20g on the rotors, means build is at:* -974g / 2.2 lbs* (rounded)

Next up:

Chain swap
Report back on rotor performance


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

phlegm said:


> Do they look familiar? The are similar to the Ashima Ai2, and here's why:


Not the Ai2, the AirRotors. The Ai2 is a different design.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

Good eye - pretty much identical.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*Chain Swap - Jewellery Box*

So this is one of those things that non-Weenies mock us for, and I can't argue with it.

Next change is the ridiculously-priced KCM X11 SL DLC (acronym overload) chain. In this case I chose black, which in itself is a poor choice since it hides chain dirt:

"Is my chain dirty?" Maybe. I can't tell - it's always black.

Anyway, here's the outgoing Shimano, uni-directional chain (which I'll get back to later) @ 239g









Not really anything bad to say about it - I just needed a new chain at this point.

Now we start with the potential mockery. First the jewel box:









... and the pseudo virginity-ending opening of the box itself - to reveal - wait for it ... ... ... a chain:









which includes 2 sets of one-time-use KMC Missing Links (TM), which BTW, did anyone else know they were single use? I didn't.









Weight of the new chain is 228g:









So, although the online documentation doesn't mention it for this SKU, like all KMC chains it is non-directional. (I had to contact KMC support to confirm.) So, I'm curious why Shimano is very strict about the orientation of their 11 sp chains, while KMC doesn't care. I'll post back if anything comes up.

Ultimately, this means another MASSIVE 11g savings. *If you wanted to make a point of worst-dollar-to-weight-loss savings, I think it is here.*

Anywho, build is at: -985g / 2.17 lbs


----------



## HyperSprite (Mar 14, 2014)

phlegm said:


> which includes 2 sets of one-time-use KMC Missing Links (TM), which BTW, did anyone else know they were single use? I didn't.


This changed for KMC and Sram for 11 speed, 10 speed missing links can be reused.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

Ah, cheers H_S - I used to run 10 spd and hadn't heard of that before.


----------



## BlownCivic (Sep 12, 2006)

I'm very interested to know if you notice a performance benefit/longevity increase with the DLC chain. I've been eyeing them up for quite some time. Just haven't convinced myself to pull the trigger yet. I did buy a ridiculously expensive Ti KCNC chain once (I think something like $225). It lasted about 20 minutes into the 1st ride before it broke once... and then again... and again... When it broke the 4th time (on the same ride) I said screw it. Walked out. Tried to return it and was politely told to pound sand.

I've been using the 11sp KMC SL for about 6 years now on both my bikes and I've had very good performance from them. Oh, and I've re-used the missing links more than a few times. No issues.


----------



## 274898 (Nov 29, 2005)

Awesome build. Even greater posts of the weight pictures. Similar to my method of madness. I use a spreadsheet to catalog all my weights. Haha.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

BlownCivic said:


> I'm very interested to know if you notice a performance benefit/longevity increase with the DLC chain. I've been eyeing them up for quite some time. Just haven't convinced myself to pull the trigger yet. I did buy a ridiculously expensive Ti KCNC chain once (I think something like $225). It lasted about 20 minutes into the 1st ride before it broke once... and then again... and again... When it broke the 4th time (on the same ride) I said screw it. Walked out. Tried to return it and was politely told to pound sand.
> 
> I've been using the 11sp KMC SL for about 6 years now on both my bikes and I've had very good performance from them. Oh, and I've re-used the missing links more than a few times. No issues.


Yep, I'll report back later in the season, but it's so tough to compare chains.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

aliikane said:


> Awesome build. Even greater posts of the weight pictures. Similar to my method of madness. I use a spreadsheet to catalog all my weights. Haha.


Cheers, thx for the comments!


----------



## Seb K (Apr 21, 2009)

Why don't you try the YBN titanium 11spd ?!!! It costs more but is much lighter although the price vs weight thing for chains is not worth it as such but depends what bike it is being fitted to .


----------



## RS VR6 (Mar 29, 2007)

I've opened and closed my 11sp quick links multiple times. They still have that firm snap when the links lock together. I'll replace it when the firm feeling is gone.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

RS VR6 said:


> ... I'll replace it when the firm feeling is gone.


I was going to make a joke here, but every word I use gets edited.


----------



## Seb K (Apr 21, 2009)

RS VR6 said:


> I've opened and closed my 11sp quick links multiple times. They still have that firm snap when the links lock together. I'll replace it when the firm feeling is gone.


It's a disclaimer Sram use to cover themselves . I think I re-used my KMC DLC lnk about 9 times before it started to rattle and you can see the edges start to flare out .


----------



## BlownCivic (Sep 12, 2006)

Seb K said:


> Why don't you try the YBN titanium 11spd ?!!! It costs more but is much lighter although the price vs weight thing for chains is not worth it as such but depends what bike it is being fitted to .


That was the brand of chain I commented on in my post. It was re-packaged by KCNC and was a significant waste of money for a bike that actually gets ridden.


----------



## Seb K (Apr 21, 2009)

BlownCivic said:


> That was the brand of chain I commented on in my post. It was re-packaged by KCNC and was a significant waste of money for a bike that actually gets ridden.


It is a waste if you are just reducing weight on certain parts . The chain is not really the most significant part to upgrade . IF you are going for ultimate WW then every part is taken into consideration . FYI my chain has been used .


----------



## BlownCivic (Sep 12, 2006)

It was a WW build. The bike was right at 17lbs 2010 Yeti ASR Carbon. I was not pleased, and even less happy about the response of the seller concerning returning/replacing the chain.


----------



## Seb K (Apr 21, 2009)

BlownCivic said:


> It was a WW build. The bike was right at 17lbs 2010 Yeti ASR Carbon. I was not pleased, and even less happy about the response of the seller concerning returning/replacing the chain.


That sucks man . Bad customer service just rubs salt into the wound . In my case the chain doesn't get used anymore as my bike is a show bike now . Some of the Ti nitride has been worn away on the rollers but not much . IME the best chains are the KMC chains . All my bikes have the SL DLC and two have the Ti nitride versions . Just one of my DLC chains had some of the coating missing and I contacted KMC customer care in the Netherlands . I got a response within two hours and they sent out a new chain and some goodies too  .


----------



## sfer1 (Feb 22, 2009)

You can get a KMC X11SL DLC chain for less than 65 euros in Germany. It's still a lot of money for a chain, but much cheaper than in the US.

As others have mentioned, the 11s missing-link can be reused several times.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

Thx sfer1 - I always like your input. Oddly enough, I did get that chain from bike24.de and the price was the best. Shimano stuff is too pricey there, but anything German (Schmolke, Tune, Schwalbe, MCFK) and some others are definitely better. 

I'm in Canada, so it's always a bit strange when a DE company can beat US, for example.


----------



## sfer1 (Feb 22, 2009)

phlegm said:


> Thx sfer1 - I always like your input. Oddly enough, I did get that chain from bike24.de and the price was the best. Shimano stuff is too pricey there, but anything German (Schmolke, Tune, Schwalbe, MCFK) and some others are definitely better.
> 
> I'm in Canada, so it's always a bit strange when a DE company can beat US, for example.


Where are you ordering Shimano from? My experience is that Shimano costs slightly less and Sram much less in Germany than in the US. e*thirteen, DT Swiss, Xpedo, Pearl Izumi and Ritchey are also considerably less pricey in Germany. FOX forks cost less in the US.

Note that if you're in Canada, German stores should deduct VAT (19%) from the price.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

Last time I checked, Chain Reaction was by far the best for Shimano.

Indeed, when I identify as Canadian, the DE stores offer a VAT-less price, which is always nice to see.


----------



## sfer1 (Feb 22, 2009)

I ordered a couple of Shimano XTR RD-9000 rear derailleurs from CRC. They came in bubble wrap bags. Their description didn't say anything about them being OEM without box. You're right about their prices being the best for Shimano, but to be fair I didn't receive the same I would have received from a German store.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

For completeness, thought I'd take a shot of the RS-1 fork as I sell it off. 1538g without maxle, cut (~180mm steerer remains), no crown race:


----------

