Specialized’s ultra-light 120-mile range e-bike - Turbo Vado SL
- Thread starter FlatSix911
- Start date
Good point. Was not familiar with that system.
Allan47.7339
Well-Known Member
The seat clamp version is too large to clamp on the seat post. I saw on one web page they don't recommend shims for the rack clamps. The Salsa has both versions, a seat post clamp combination and a clamp on the seat post version. The link on my post above was for the version that clamps anywhere on the post. The Vado internal frame clamp is more common on newer road frames.
Last edited:
Jazin
New Member
Just ordered the Vado SL 4.0 EQ. Selling point for me is the weight. I bought a hitch bike rack 2 years ago that has a 40 pound limit per bike. So I didn’t want to shell out another $600 for a family bike rack. Also, I like my road bike and I’m in decent shape. I just want to go further. Once in a while I ride with my business partner or my brother in-law who are great riders and I can keep up with them for the first hour and then I get tired and they have to wait up for me. . So I think this will do it. I got the EQ for the fenders and rack. How hard would it be to take the fenders off on a nice day for a 50 miles ride? Also doe anyone have the 4.0 and is the ride too rigid?
Last edited:
I think there is a thread below that discusses removing the fenders. I wouldn't bother even tho the front occasionally does tend to pick up road debris and rattle around. I got the EQ for the fenders to use in the rainy season. I do have other bikes to ride as well so leaving the fenders on is easy decision for me.
I don't find the 4.0 too rigid but then the 1.5 tires and 80 psi are more compliant than my other road bike. If I had the chance to buy again I would probably spring for the 5.0. It does add the Future Shock for additonal compliance as well as 12 speed and (I think) other component upgrades. In Court's review he also recommended the 5.0 over the 4.0 for the extra features but I wasn't sure how much I was going to enjoy the SL.
I am seriously thinking about getting the Turbo Vado SL 5.0 EQ, and have a deposit on one. I’m still thinking about stepping up to the Creo SLE5. I’m a Clydesdale and can ride my analog bike 20+ miles at a 15 mph clip. I am working up to 60 miles per day. My main use would be road riding and possibly commute, but I do fantasize some easy dirt trails. My issue with the Creo is the extra cost and the reach is a bit long for what I want - I actually like the position of the Diverge but it is not electric. I am concerned i may be givin up range with the Vado. Any opinion? Given where I live I am looking at Specialized almost exclusively.
Last edited:
Copyrider
Active Member
In my opinion, Vado SLs, especially the EQ versions are best suited for commuting and light road use. Narrow street tires and aggressive fenders here. Non EQs get a tire setup that will tackle some light trails okay and they forego the city-style fenders, so that may be a better way to go for you.
Copyrider
Active Member
Court's review states that he'd recommend the 5.0 over the 4.0 "for a little more." Model for model the 5.0 is $1000 more. That's substantial in my book.
I think you'd find any of the SL bikes will work well for you. What is your concern for range? In Eco mode you should be able to go faster and easier than you do now and 60 miles is definitely doable in the default eco mode. You could also get the range extender - I recently got one and it seems to work well.
Lol, I thought the same thing. A little more would be the $150 extra on the EQ for fenders and rack. Having said that, I am thinking of also getting the 5.0 SL to replace a gravel bike I have. I really like the assist the SL provides and can see using a fenderless 5.0 SL for non technical off roading. As someone mentioned in another thread, the extra assist the ebikes provide make it easy to explore and deviate along routes that you wouldn't normally do on an unpowered bike.
I am not worried about range, more about fatigue from riding in one position over the other. I think the fenders are a bigger issue for me. As for the 4 v 5 sentiment, I do see a benefit with the carbon fork, dampening on the handle and larger cassette is worth the extra money.
I just purchased the Specialized Vado Sl 5.0 without EQ. Probably should have gone for the EQ, but I really didn't think I would need the fender and the rack, which would just add more weight. While demoing I rode the Vado SL up some pretty steep hills. This was a real test for me, as I have not been riding for a year because of health problems. To my surprise, I was able to go up the steep hills fairly easily in the turbo (top) mode. I also have a Specialized Turbo Levo, which I took up the same hills when I demoed that about a year ago. The Levo has a more powerful engine (4x you) but on the other hand is much heavier. So yes, I had to work harder on the Vado SL, but it was still in my physical capabilities, which is good since I am in my 70's and a woman. The other bike I considered was the Orbea Gain line. Cheaper price, a bit lighter with a rear hub motor. In my opinion, the Orbea does not have quite the power of the Vado SL. I struggled to get up a pretty steep hill and it took me several tries to get the power mode and gears right before I could make it with a lot of effort. Also the Vado SL is supposed to have a better range as it has a 320w battery, plus the extra battery is cheaper by $200 than the Orbea gain extra battery. The other thing is that I prefer a flat handle bar and a more upright position. If I purchased a decent Orbea Gain, I would have to swap out the handle bars. Plus the Vado comes with the front and back lights and the Mission Control device on the handle bars. Additionally I spent a lot of time looking at the specs of other so-called lightweight ebikes. Some were more powerful, but heavier and did not necessarily have a better distance range. So hence my decision to get the Vado sl. We will see how I do.
Last edited:
Copyrider
Active Member
Looking at it solely on the numbers, one would think the SL is woefully inadequate compared to the standard Vado, when it comes to climbing hills. Take it from someone in San Francisco who's ridden both on some ridiculous hills--they are closer than many would think.
In fact, as you learn to make your gear selection specifically to maximize your ebike's assist, the difference gets smaller. For example, when I first got my regular Vado 4.0, I rode it and shifted like I would a regular bike. I tried to take it up Filbert St., on Russian Hill, and seriously contemplated returning the bike. The heavy beast was no match for the 20%+ grade with me standing on the pedals, trying to muscle it up.
I quickly learned that the key was to shift earlier and plan to spin a little faster at lower torque to make full use of the motor. Once I had this figured out, I was shifting farther in advance of the climb, keeping my cadence high and staying in the saddle. The bike went up the hill like a champ.
What I found was, no amount of torque that I could put out over any kind of distance could overcome the extra weight and wide tires of the Vado. I often had it loaded with a pannier and some accessories too. It had plenty of motor to overcome this, though, and that worked best for SF's steep hills.
On the SL, it's much the same, if I adopt my ebike-minded shifting and cadence. But the weight is greatly reduced. The riding dynamic is also greatly changed. The SL handles more like a bicycle to me, so the manner in which I move the frame or position myself on it for a climb has a greater effect on my performance. I've made many more adjustments after long rides to my SL than I ever did to the regular Vado--to eek out a little better performance wherever I could. On the Vado, I pretty much jumped on and rode and never really adjusted much of anything.
So, the other day, I was pedaling on the SL up a really steep part of Telegraph Hill--a part where many streets are turned into steps because they are so steep. Taking what I know about hills, I shifted well and stayed planted in the saddle, Granny gear engaged and cadence high. At one point, I was so steep that my front wheel came up, under the torque of the tiny SL motor!
I now tackle the same hills on my SL, with barely any more effort than I did with the regular Vado. I enjoy the SL more, too, because I felt that, for me at least, the Vado gave too much assist and I couldn't dial in the right amount of boost to make it feel like a regular bike. I loved the speed, but I missed the feeling of just simply cycling when conditions permitted. The SL answers that ask, with 90% of the hill-climbing prowess of the regular Vado when I need it.
In fact, as you learn to make your gear selection specifically to maximize your ebike's assist, the difference gets smaller. For example, when I first got my regular Vado 4.0, I rode it and shifted like I would a regular bike. I tried to take it up Filbert St., on Russian Hill, and seriously contemplated returning the bike. The heavy beast was no match for the 20%+ grade with me standing on the pedals, trying to muscle it up.
I quickly learned that the key was to shift earlier and plan to spin a little faster at lower torque to make full use of the motor. Once I had this figured out, I was shifting farther in advance of the climb, keeping my cadence high and staying in the saddle. The bike went up the hill like a champ.
What I found was, no amount of torque that I could put out over any kind of distance could overcome the extra weight and wide tires of the Vado. I often had it loaded with a pannier and some accessories too. It had plenty of motor to overcome this, though, and that worked best for SF's steep hills.
On the SL, it's much the same, if I adopt my ebike-minded shifting and cadence. But the weight is greatly reduced. The riding dynamic is also greatly changed. The SL handles more like a bicycle to me, so the manner in which I move the frame or position myself on it for a climb has a greater effect on my performance. I've made many more adjustments after long rides to my SL than I ever did to the regular Vado--to eek out a little better performance wherever I could. On the Vado, I pretty much jumped on and rode and never really adjusted much of anything.
So, the other day, I was pedaling on the SL up a really steep part of Telegraph Hill--a part where many streets are turned into steps because they are so steep. Taking what I know about hills, I shifted well and stayed planted in the saddle, Granny gear engaged and cadence high. At one point, I was so steep that my front wheel came up, under the torque of the tiny SL motor!
I now tackle the same hills on my SL, with barely any more effort than I did with the regular Vado. I enjoy the SL more, too, because I felt that, for me at least, the Vado gave too much assist and I couldn't dial in the right amount of boost to make it feel like a regular bike. I loved the speed, but I missed the feeling of just simply cycling when conditions permitted. The SL answers that ask, with 90% of the hill-climbing prowess of the regular Vado when I need it.
rochrunner
Well-Known Member
- Region
- USA
- City
- Rochester Hills MI
Good write-up, Copyrider. Makes me wish even more that I had waited on getting the Vado and known about the SL coming out. Of course, supply being what it is, I my might still not have a bike and with my current injury I probably wouldn't be able to ride at all. So some silver lining in all this.
Copyrider
Active Member
They are some work, even with assist. SF itself compensates with nice, cool sunny weather pretty much year-round, though. And the views... My bike was purchased to be my commuter and it works great in that capacity. The recreational aspects of it--like biking up Russian Hill in 68 degree sunshine in July to catch a view of Alcatraz--are simply a bonus.
Copyrider
Active Member
If my Vado hadn't been stolen, I would still be riding it without a single thought of regret about its purchase, even in the face of the SL. There's plenty to love about both iterations and I do love both bikes. My Vado 4.0 was a beast--very smooth and a competent commuter over rough city streets. I considered the speed and power to mix in traffic with minimal effort an added safety feature. I simply wished for a better recreational cycling experience.
The SL requires more leg work to produce the same return on my commute. On paper, its output is half the Vado's. In my experience, it feels more like 90%, once you learn the nuances of maximizing a machine that's part human, part electric power (regardless of the ratios and multiple other contributing forces). It merely flips the coin the other way in recreational cycling, as the more powerful Vado was probably 90% the cycling experience of the light and nimble SL.
Enjoy your bike! I'm a big fan and advocate of all Vados.
rochrunner
Well-Known Member
- Region
- USA
- City
- Rochester Hills MI
I'm retired so my usage is 100% recreational. I have my Vado tuned down to 15% assist in Eco mode, which is quite sufficient and often even feels like more than I need. So one of the SL models would certainly be suitable for me, and I really would like to lose some of the Vado's weight. With my ongoing back problems it's really not safe for me to lift entirely by myself, which is a situation I don't particularly like. The bike carrier on my car actually came with a removable ramp and I've been using that on occasion when loading and unloading.
Copyrider
Active Member
The weight is certainly the major difference and is a key player in choosing the right Vado between these two, especially when the bike is not in motion. I occasionally took a train on my commute (back when we did that LOL) and that's when the shortcomings of 50+ pounds of bike plus a full bag mounted on the rack really showed themselves. Getting down or up to train platforms was an ordeal. And I never even thought about hoisting it up on a bus bike rack.
Similar threads
