Specialized Turbo Levo SL II Comp Alloy review: a sweet-handling eMTB that lacks power and needs better spec

The newest Specialized Turbo Levo SL II Comp Alloy has a compelling price tag and brilliantly adjustable geometry, but the motor power and battery life mean it falls short of the competition.

Costing £5,250 / $7,000 / €6,600, this latest Levo SL is the most affordable way to get a lightweight Spesh thanks to an aluminium frame and lower-spec components.

Despite the respectable price tag, it shares the same super-adjustable geometry, FSR suspension, 1.2 SL motor and 320Wh battery with its more expensive siblings.

On paper, it looks like a tempting proposition, but it falls short on the trails.

Despite the highly adjustable Stumpjumper EVO-inspired geometry that you can tweak to your heart's content, and the sweet handling as a result, the Turbo SL 1.2 motor lacks power and torque compared to the best lightweight electric mountain bikes. The battery life is also disappointing.

The spec could also do with refining. The brakes and drivetrain let the sublime chassis down, further impacting performance.

Specialized Turbo Levo SL II Comp Alloy frame

Aside from the frame’s M5 aluminium construction, this more affordable model and the carbon version are startlingly similar.

They share the same silhouette, eschewing the side-brace design of the previous Levo SL and Stumpjumper. In its place is a much cleaner aesthetic.

Some brands, such as Orbea, try to make their alloy frames hard to tell apart from the more expensive carbon versions. Specialized takes no such route here, with clearly visible welds.

Cables run internally through ports on the side of the down tube, rather than through the head tube.

It’s a very sleek-looking bike though, especially in this Satin Pine and Forest Green paint finish.

The 320Wh battery and 50Nm-torque, 320W SL 1.2 motor are neatly integrated into the frame, as is substantial frame protection including a neat rubber flap over the main pivot.

Specialized’s 150mm-travel FSR suspension is used out-back, with revised kinematics compared to the first-generation bike. The brand claims this provides a flatter leverage curve for more support and playfulness at the beginning of the stroke.

Specialized Turbo Levo SL II Comp Alloy geometry

The range of geometry personalisation is impressive, and uses the brand’s S-Sizing range, where seat tube lengths are short but reach figures grow as bikes get bigger.

An offset headset cup is included to alter the head angle by one degree either side of the claimed stock 64.6-degree number. The chainstays are also adjustable to cater for either mixed wheels (29in front, 27.5in rear) or full 29in setups.

It’s supplied with a 27.5in rear wheel that’s tucked in by short 432mm chainstays.

Although not approved by Specialized, the 29in position can still be used with the smaller rear wheel. Do this, and the stays grow to 442mm.

An offset bushing on the shock eyelet raises or lowers the bottom bracket by 5mm.

At 6ft tall, I tested a size S4, giving a 470mm reach and 425mm seat tube length.

Specialized Turbo Levo SL II Comp Alloy specifications

Suspension is taken care of by a Fox setup comprising a Float X Performance rear shock and a 160mm-travel 36 Rhythm fork.

Specialized takes care of the wheels, tyres, cockpit and saddle, and there’s an X-Fusion Manic dropper post. Notably, both tyres are the brand’s midweight GRID Trail casing models.

The bike has a full SRAM NX Eagle drivetrain, alongside Code R four-piston brakes with 200mm CentreLine rotors.

Without pedals, the S4 bike weighs 20.10kg.

Specialized Turbo Levo SL II Comp Alloy ride impressions

I tested the Turbo Levo SL II Comp Alloy around various parts of the UK. It took in Welsh trail centres, my old-school Midlands XC loops, the downhill trails at the Forest of Dean, and laps of Ashton Court and Leigh Woods in Bristol.

Conditions were typically mixed, varying from dry and blown-out to wet and muddy.

Setup

With the plethora of geometry adjustments available, setting up the Turbo Levo SL II can feel daunting at first.

To start with, I left the geometry alone, maintaining the stock settings. Focusing on the suspension, I inflated the fork to 82psi to give 20 per cent sag, set the rebound halfway through the range from closed and left the compression fully open.

I set the rear shock with 210psi for 30 per cent sag. Again, rebound was in the middle and with no compression adjustment, aside from the firm pedal platform setting, I hit the trail.

After a few rides, I upped the rear-shock pressure to 220psi and removed a few psi from the fork, to get a more balanced suspension feel from front to rear. Happy with the amount of progression in both the fork and shock, I left the volume spacers alone.

Another few rides later, I started playing with the geometry adjustments. Feeling my weight was biased a little towards the rear of the bike, I flipped the chainstays to the longer 29in position but kept the 27.5in rear wheel in place. I much preferred the handling of the bike in this setting.

I found this was my preferred setting with the smaller rear wheel. I played around with the headset cup and offset shock bushing settings, but liked it best with the stock headset setup and the low bottom bracket position.

In this setting, it gave a 63.6-degree head angle and 332mm bottom bracket height.

Specialized Turbo Levo SL II Comp Alloy climbing performance

The Turbo Levo SL II Comp Alloy is competent on the climbs.

The seated position is comfortable, not feeling overly upright or stretched-out.

The seat angle looks relatively slack on paper, but on the trail, it doesn’t feel as laid back as the numbers may suggest.

Once I’d added some more pressure to the rear shock, the bike pedalled keenly. The shock sitting higher in its stroke helps resist bobbing and keep the seat tube angle from slackening too much.

I would like to see a steeper angle on the Specialized because it wouldn’t adversely affect the bike elsewhere, but would improve performance. As it is, it's fine, if not outstanding.

Traction is good though, with the Eliminator rear tyre not struggling for grip in chunky terrain.

The SRAM NX drivetrain is a bit of a letdown though.

It lacks the range of its higher-end SRAM siblings (it’s got an 11-50t range instead of the 10-52t found on GX and higher) and its rivals from Shimano (10-51t).

The shifting isn’t very smooth under power, which doesn’t fill you with confidence. I found it compromised how much commitment I dared give to shifts in preparation of crux moves.

Motor performance and battery life

While the geometry and suspension lend themselves well to climbing, the motor and battery performance leave a lot to be desired.

The SL 1.2 motor is noticeably less powerful than Bosch’s SX and Fazua’s Ride 60 motor.

While it's quiet, I often found myself wanting more grunt on steep climbs or when cresting technical sections.

If you want to keep up with full-power eMTBs, you’ll have to put serious effort in, or be left behind.

While power and torque are limited, I found the micro-adjust feature useful. The preset Eco, Trail and Turbo modes offer an easy balance of assistance and battery conservation, but the 10 per cent Micro Adjustments really fine-tune the ride.

Using the modes carefully, I managed 32km and 1,000m of climbing on a single charge from the 320Wh battery.

While respectable, it’s not as good as Bosch’s Performance Line CX motor and 400Wh battery.

On the plus side, drag when the motor is turned off is minimal. You’d be hard-pressed to tell the difference between this and a hefty non-assisted enduro bike.

Specialized Turbo Levo SL II Comp Alloy descending performance

Although the Turbo Levo SL II struggles on climbs, it fights back on descents.

It feels like a well-refined and capable machine that's easy to ride as quickly as your skills allow.

The geometry is the centrepiece of its capable and adaptable nature. The stock numbers worked reasonably well for me, but I much preferred the handling of the bike with the Horst-link pivot chip set to the longer, 29in rear-wheel setting.

The short rear end kept the handling agile despite the reasonable reach and moderately slack head angle. The smaller 27.5in rear wheel also helps. This is a bike that loves to slice through corners.

While not recommended by Specialized, flipping the geometry-adjust chips on the chainstay to the longer setting, while keeping the 27.5in rear wheel, helped balance the bike out nicely.

It has a low centre of gravity, and while pedal strikes were a little more frequent, the handling benefits outweighed this, helping it rip through corners and feel well-balanced front and rear.

On steeper terrain, it's easy to move around the bike to keep your weight centred. It inspires confidence and enables you to push on. It rarely feels like too much bike on flatter, tighter trails either.

The suspension performance is also very impressive. It feels taut under power yet provides ample grip and support in all conditions.

Small bumps are erased with ease, while bigger hits pose few issues. I rarely felt any bottom-outs, even if the o-ring on the shock proved I had used all of the travel.

Such is its capability, the Levo SL is screaming for a rear tyre with a burlier casing and longer-travel dropper post.

The rear tyre, with its Grid Trail casing, folds easily in corners and the 170mm-travel dropper is too short, especially if you’ve got long legs.

I’d also prefer to see SRAM’s Code Bronze brakes, rather than the Code R. Not only do the Bronze brakes feature the sleeker 'Stealth' look, but they also feature the brand's SwingLink technology.

I much prefer the feel of SRAM brakes that use this; they have less dead lever travel and, to me, feel as though they produce more power.

How does the Specialized Turbo Levo SL II Comp Alloy compare to the Canyon Neuron:ONfly?

I’ve also been testing the Neuron:ONfly CF9, which costs £6,499 – £1,249 more than the Specialized.

The Turbo Levo SL II is all about the chassis, rather than the motor. The opposite is true of the Canyon.

Its Bosch Performance Line SX is, in my opinion, the class-leader for lightweight eMTB motors. It demands a high cadence to access all its power, but when you do, it's mightily impressive.

With nearly double the assistance of the Turbo SL 1.2 motor, you can motor along at a much quicker pace. Torque is only marginally higher, at 55Nm vs 50Nm, but on the climbs you can really feel the difference.

The Neuron:ONfly gaps the Turbo Levo SL with ease. Riding the two back-to-back highlights this even more.

While the Canyon scores points in the motor department, it loses out in the chassis stakes. The geometry, while very good, isn’t as adjustable as the Specialized.

Even taking into account the reduced travel (140mm versus 150mm), the rear suspension is harsher too. It’s not as supple over bumps and drives through the travel too quickly. This leads to a bike that, although you can ride it quickly, isn’t as confidence-inspiring on descents.

The Neuron:ONfly pulls more ground back in the spec battle. While it's more expensive here in the UK, in Europe the price difference between the two bikes is minimal.

That extra outlay gets you a full-carbon frame, wireless shifting, and better-quality brakes, suspension and wheels. On paper, it's a far better value proposition, with the cheaper CF8 looking even better value.

Both bikes are hamstrung by under-gunned tyres though. The Super Trail and Grid Trail casings, from Schwalbe and Specialized respectively, aren’t tough enough for electric bikes.

At least the Butcher/Eliminator tyres on the Turbo Levo SL II have fairly aggressive tread patterns and soft compounds.

The Hans Dampf/Nobby Nic combo of the Canyon is at odds with the bike's capabilities, especially the Speed Grip compound Nobby Nic out-back.

Both of these bikes are flawed, but if I had to choose one, it would be the Canyon – I’d just be sure to slap some more suitable tyres on.

Specialized Turbo Levo SL II Comp Alloy bottom line

It doesn’t take long to realise the Levo SL is all about the chassis.

The Turbo SL 1.2 motor is no match for the very best on the market, however. It lacks power and torque, and the battery life isn’t as good as it should be.

The spec sheet also has a few holes in it. SRAM’s NX drivetrain is underwhelming and the basic Code R brakes lack power and feel. Lastly, the rear tyre needs a tougher casing to make the most of the bike's clear descending capability.

As such, the Turbo Levo SL II Comp Alloy is a sweet-handling bike, but one that's gagging for more power and some mild spec changes.