Specialized Sirrus X 4.0 vs 5.0
08-09-20, 12:22 PM
#1
Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2020
Posts: 1
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Specialized Sirrus X 4.0 vs 5.0
Hi to all,
this is my first post and after hours of searching I can’t find a website or forum that directly compares the ride quality between the 2020 Specialized Sirrus X 4.0 (aluminum) versus the 5.0 (carbon) model. The frame and tires are different between these two models. Price is not an option. Is carbon simply better and smoother and better for hills? Or is the Aluminum a better feel?
type of riding is 75% road and city riding. 25% gravel.
what’s important is the most comfortable ride for my back.
thanks all. Sorry if this has been discussed but I couldn’t find it.
test riding bikes isn’t an option unfortunately
this is my first post and after hours of searching I can’t find a website or forum that directly compares the ride quality between the 2020 Specialized Sirrus X 4.0 (aluminum) versus the 5.0 (carbon) model. The frame and tires are different between these two models. Price is not an option. Is carbon simply better and smoother and better for hills? Or is the Aluminum a better feel?
type of riding is 75% road and city riding. 25% gravel.
what’s important is the most comfortable ride for my back.
thanks all. Sorry if this has been discussed but I couldn’t find it.
test riding bikes isn’t an option unfortunately
08-09-20, 08:08 PM
#2
Senior Member
I have a 2020 Sirrus X 4.0, bought this spring. I cannot comment on the carbon X 5.0 but I can give you my thoughts on the X 4.0 for your consideration.
The first opinion I'll share is that I think the Sirrus X is optimized for trail riding / offroading, and for that purpose it's very capable.
I'm really pleased with how it handles on the trails I ride, where I encounter a lot of packed stone + sand surfaces, some very rocky sections and lots of puddles with standing water.
Everything I had hoped for in choosing this bike comes true on the trail -- it's sturdy, the stock tire option is good and durable and there's fork clearance for larger tires if that's your preference, the disc brakes are very responsive, there's a high bottom clearance and the 1 x drivetrain is worry free on the trail, I appreciatee the futureshock suspension in the headset / stem (standard on both X4.0 and X5.0) and the geometry produces an upright riding position that helps me navigate all kinds of obstacles below with good balance. As a choice for a trail bike, I'm happy with it.
What this bike does NOT do, for me, is cruise along at high speed -- I have no illusions that this is a flat-bar road bike, as some other hybrids are touted.
On pavement, it feels (to me) more like a mountain bike than a road bike. That's fine for me, I don't need this bike to hit speeds on pavement, but if you're thinking of this bike for regular use on a 15 or 20-mile commute, know that it's slower than a road bike or than a standard Sirrus would be.
On a positive note, I am confident either the 4.0 or the carbon 5.0 would give you a ride position that favors your concerns for comfort of your back. You sit rather upright on this frame and the bars are wide which relaxes your shoulders and the bars return a bit back toward you so never are you likely to be stretched out too forward in your reach. Sizing is relevant of course, but the standard position on this bike is not very aggressive.
I'm not sure how to judge whether the carbon X 5.0 is worth the extra cost above the cost of the X 4.0. I guess one question is whether you will be riding hills -- I don't have any hills to contend with, so for my choice the carbon option didn't offer me a substantial upgrade as I only ride flat terrain here. But if you're more confident in the carbon option as the best-quality option, and the best way to spend your money, I certainly understand that and I'm not saying carbon isn't worth it . . . it just wasn't worth it FOR ME, because this bike isn't a speed machine and I'm riding flat routes always so I was satisfied with aluminum.
Not to confuse the matter, but I'll offer one last thought -- the standard Sirrus line (as opposed to the X-line) is rated very well as a pavement machine. In the standard Sirrus line, I would definitely see the potential benefits of carbon over aluminum -- for weight and speed -- if you have the money to get the best available machine. There is a popular SIRRUS thread / discussion over in the Hybrid forum where you can gather a lot of testimony on how the carbon Sirrus handles the road, and lots of owner photos of their carbon models. I believe the standard Sirrus carbon would outperform any model of the Sirrus X line ON PAVEMENT, and depending upon the conditions of the trails / offroad routes you wish to ride you might look into whether the standard Sirrus is worth a close look since your intent is mostly on pavement. On the other hand, if you plan to ride gnarly offroad conditions I would hate to suggest you get a standard Sirrus and beat the hell out of it on tough trail terrain.
Consider some of this as you contemplate spending carbon money. Again I'll say that I'm thrilled with the toughness of the X4.0, but all the qualities I value for its offroad capability mean a little compromise to its performance on the road.
The first opinion I'll share is that I think the Sirrus X is optimized for trail riding / offroading, and for that purpose it's very capable.
I'm really pleased with how it handles on the trails I ride, where I encounter a lot of packed stone + sand surfaces, some very rocky sections and lots of puddles with standing water.
Everything I had hoped for in choosing this bike comes true on the trail -- it's sturdy, the stock tire option is good and durable and there's fork clearance for larger tires if that's your preference, the disc brakes are very responsive, there's a high bottom clearance and the 1 x drivetrain is worry free on the trail, I appreciatee the futureshock suspension in the headset / stem (standard on both X4.0 and X5.0) and the geometry produces an upright riding position that helps me navigate all kinds of obstacles below with good balance. As a choice for a trail bike, I'm happy with it.
What this bike does NOT do, for me, is cruise along at high speed -- I have no illusions that this is a flat-bar road bike, as some other hybrids are touted.
On pavement, it feels (to me) more like a mountain bike than a road bike. That's fine for me, I don't need this bike to hit speeds on pavement, but if you're thinking of this bike for regular use on a 15 or 20-mile commute, know that it's slower than a road bike or than a standard Sirrus would be.
On a positive note, I am confident either the 4.0 or the carbon 5.0 would give you a ride position that favors your concerns for comfort of your back. You sit rather upright on this frame and the bars are wide which relaxes your shoulders and the bars return a bit back toward you so never are you likely to be stretched out too forward in your reach. Sizing is relevant of course, but the standard position on this bike is not very aggressive.
I'm not sure how to judge whether the carbon X 5.0 is worth the extra cost above the cost of the X 4.0. I guess one question is whether you will be riding hills -- I don't have any hills to contend with, so for my choice the carbon option didn't offer me a substantial upgrade as I only ride flat terrain here. But if you're more confident in the carbon option as the best-quality option, and the best way to spend your money, I certainly understand that and I'm not saying carbon isn't worth it . . . it just wasn't worth it FOR ME, because this bike isn't a speed machine and I'm riding flat routes always so I was satisfied with aluminum.
Not to confuse the matter, but I'll offer one last thought -- the standard Sirrus line (as opposed to the X-line) is rated very well as a pavement machine. In the standard Sirrus line, I would definitely see the potential benefits of carbon over aluminum -- for weight and speed -- if you have the money to get the best available machine. There is a popular SIRRUS thread / discussion over in the Hybrid forum where you can gather a lot of testimony on how the carbon Sirrus handles the road, and lots of owner photos of their carbon models. I believe the standard Sirrus carbon would outperform any model of the Sirrus X line ON PAVEMENT, and depending upon the conditions of the trails / offroad routes you wish to ride you might look into whether the standard Sirrus is worth a close look since your intent is mostly on pavement. On the other hand, if you plan to ride gnarly offroad conditions I would hate to suggest you get a standard Sirrus and beat the hell out of it on tough trail terrain.
Consider some of this as you contemplate spending carbon money. Again I'll say that I'm thrilled with the toughness of the X4.0, but all the qualities I value for its offroad capability mean a little compromise to its performance on the road.
08-10-20, 08:36 AM
#3
-------
Join Date: Jul 2020
Location: Tejas
Posts: 12,790
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9648 Post(s)
Liked 6,363 Times
in
3,503 Posts
I just bought two Sirrus 4.0s for my wife and I a little over a month ago. We both love the bikes. We bought them for just the use you describe, and wanted something that was reasonable comfortable while being reasonably athletic for fitness.
I echo Jimmy's comments on it likely being a better bike for pavement/gravel. It is light, quick, handles well, and allows us to ride at good speed. We cannot keep up with the young (or old) hotshots on road bikes, but we are in our 50s and 60s and are just getting back on bikes after a 10+ year hiatus. Nonetheless, on flat roads/paths we'll often average about 12 mph over our 10-15 mile rides, and find ourselves passing as much as being passed. I expect that to improve as we get in better shape and when we can ride in less than 90 degree plus temps.
Whichever way you go, I would plan to replace the pedals as the stock flats are really bad. We switched to RaceFace (Ride for her and AEffect for him), and the improvement was immediately noticeable by both of us.
I echo Jimmy's comments on it likely being a better bike for pavement/gravel. It is light, quick, handles well, and allows us to ride at good speed. We cannot keep up with the young (or old) hotshots on road bikes, but we are in our 50s and 60s and are just getting back on bikes after a 10+ year hiatus. Nonetheless, on flat roads/paths we'll often average about 12 mph over our 10-15 mile rides, and find ourselves passing as much as being passed. I expect that to improve as we get in better shape and when we can ride in less than 90 degree plus temps.
Whichever way you go, I would plan to replace the pedals as the stock flats are really bad. We switched to RaceFace (Ride for her and AEffect for him), and the improvement was immediately noticeable by both of us.
