Specialized Roubaix or a Tarmac

willbevan

Hi all,

I have done a search around the forums, and googled round the net as i am trying to decide between a faster racing bike like a tarmac and a more relaxed bike like the roubaix.

Now i've seen the interview from Boonen (i think? spelling?) about saying how good the roubaix is... but i keep finding mixed reviews online.

Now I want to buy a bike that will last me for a fair few years and am looking at the expert or pro of both (i have not ridden them yet and i know i need to!, but i smahsed my knee up mountain bike recently and its healing , so spending as much time researching atm as possible)

Does anyone have both, or riden both and can give me a couple of words advice?

I am interested in doing the club 10s, and also longer 80-100mile rides on it. Now the LBS i did go into and will be test riding them from said that there is no reason the tarmac if well fitted won't be comfortable?

I keep reading the roubaix is slugish to accelerate and doesnt climb well etc etc, which does worry me.

Now the fact i will be upgrading from a bike that is about £170 new , means i think that any bike will feel great in comparison in that price range, and I do not want to make a bad discison i will regret :S

Thanks for any input

Will

EDIT - One reason i'm posting this, is becuase im skeptical between the speed differences between the two bikes, is it that much?

fto-si

willbevan wrote:

I keep reading the roubaix is slugish to accelerate and doesnt climb well etc etc, which does worry me.

Wouldn't that be largely dependant on who is riding it?

I have a Roubaix and I am very happy with it, I use it for 9 mile commutes to work up to 100 mile rides.

willbevan

fto-si wrote:

willbevan wrote:

I keep reading the roubaix is slugish to accelerate and doesnt climb well etc etc, which does worry me.

Wouldn't that be largely dependant on who is riding it?

I have a Roubaix and I am very happy with it, I use it for 9 mile commutes to work up to 100 mile rides.

Yep im slugish up hills

Mind if i ask which version you have of it, did you try any of the supposedly better frames presuming you don't have an s-works that is (im curious to the diference between the 6r, 8r or 10r) and notice any difference?

fto-si

I own an Elite, standard apart from changing to Mavic Aksium wheels.
I didn't try any of the other Roubaix's in the range as the Elite was the only one in my budget.

willbevan

hmmm heard a lot of people chaning the wheels on them :S mind if i ask why you did?

azzerb

fto-si wrote:

willbevan wrote:

I keep reading the roubaix is slugish to accelerate and doesnt climb well etc etc, which does worry me.

Wouldn't that be largely dependant on who is riding it?

I have a Roubaix and I am very happy with it, I use it for 9 mile commutes to work up to 100 mile rides.

The roubaix can be sluggish to climb in comparison to another bike, no matter how good or bad the person riding it is, as the person riding it is a fixed variable.

fto-si

azzerb wrote:

fto-si wrote:

willbevan wrote:

I keep reading the roubaix is slugish to accelerate and doesnt climb well etc etc, which does worry me.

Wouldn't that be largely dependant on who is riding it?

I have a Roubaix and I am very happy with it, I use it for 9 mile commutes to work up to 100 mile rides.

The roubaix can be sluggish to climb in comparison to another bike, no matter how good or bad the person riding it is, as the person riding it is a fixed variable.

Out of interest what makes it sluggish then over another bike?

redddraggon

Personally I'd go for a Tarmac. But I find I'm more comfortable in a more aggressive position.

azzerb

fto-si wrote:

azzerb wrote:

fto-si wrote:

willbevan wrote:

I keep reading the roubaix is slugish to accelerate and doesnt climb well etc etc, which does worry me.

Wouldn't that be largely dependant on who is riding it?

I have a Roubaix and I am very happy with it, I use it for 9 mile commutes to work up to 100 mile rides.

The roubaix can be sluggish to climb in comparison to another bike, no matter how good or bad the person riding it is, as the person riding it is a fixed variable.

Out of interest what makes it sluggish then over another bike?

I'm not saying it is, I'm just pointing out the flaw in your argument. Maybe you're taking the word sluggish too far, it doesn't unnecessarily mean slow, just slower.

But, weight, stiffness and position can make a frame more or less "sluggish" than another.

Monty Dog

If you're planning on riding club 10s or even racing, I'd go for the Tarmac because of the lower front-end. If you want to fit clip-on tri bars, you want the headtube as short as possible to getter a better position. It's not to say that the Roubaix is a bad bike, its more suited to sportives and comfort, rather than speed and efficiency.

trashcanman

I've got the Roubaix expert and my mate has the Tarmac expert, both '07 bikes, I wouldn't swap mine and he wouldn't swap his, it really is a case of try both and see which one you prefer.

willbevan

redddraggon wrote:

Personally I'd go for a Tarmac. But I find I'm more comfortable in a more aggressive position.

Red am i right in thinking you had or have a planet X? Was wondeiring if you had ridden both a Planet SL Pro Carbon and a Tarmac, as i am tempted to save my money and get a PX :S

Has anyone else had the experience of that?

I will be going to ride both the tarmac and the roubaix, as welll as a cube, if i cant tell the difference in frames then i might as welll go for a cheaper one and then save my money for a TT bike lol, oh the things do go around lol

redddraggon

willbevan wrote:

Red am i right in thinking you had or have a planet X?

Nope, but I considered one, along with a Tarmac, and a Pinarello F3:13. The F3:13 won in the end out of the three, but after much consideration decided to build my own bike to my own specs.

I still don't think you can beat the P-X on value though.

willbevan

redddraggon wrote:

willbevan wrote:

Red am i right in thinking you had or have a planet X?

Nope, but I considered one, along with a Tarmac, and a Pinarello F3:13. The F3:13 won in the end out of the three, but after much consideration decided to build my own bike to my own specs.

I still don't think you can beat the P-X on value though.

Mind if i ask why you went with the Pinarello?

I am thinking if i don't go with a PX then it will be a custom build, bt a gradual build. Some decent wheels for my current bike, then a new frame and finishing kit, and lastly new groupset.... (which im still deciding on the whole SRAM vs Shimano vs Campag lol)

redddraggon

willbevan wrote:

Mind if i ask why you went with the Pinarello?

It looked the best. Didn't get it in the end though, I thought WH-R550s on a £2000 bike was a bit cheap - so I left it in the shop.

northpole

Like you say, going from a £170 bike any of these will be superb in comparison.

I have a Roubaix Pro (07) with Dura-ace wheels and crank and I reckon it is fantastic going up hills compared with my old Condor Italia - and so it should be!!

Where it scores even better over the Italia, and I suspect, over the Tarmac, is in providing a slightly more upright riding position - a priority for me due to a lower lumbar problem I suffered a couple of years ago.

If this isn't of importance to you, you may well find a more sporty position from the Tarmac/ Willier/ Condor models (to name but a few) will provide more feedback/ a livelier feel to the whole cycling experience.

There's only one way to find out - arrange a test ride!

Peter

willbevan

northpole wrote:

There's only one way to find out - arrange a test ride!

Will do shortly, can't wait! Just some stupid idiot namely me went mountainbiking a few weeks ago, not wearing knee or shin pads and came off and smashed my right knee, almost all good now so roll on bikes!

pneumatic

I've test ridden a Comp and I own an Expert. They're really good bikes. Frankly I'm not competitive enough to recognise sluggishness on hills, but I took my Roubaix up the Ventoux and it did me just fine. Most of the time I feel as though I'm holding it back, rather than the other way round.

My understanding is that the Tarmac is a pure race bike and the Roubaix a slightly more relaxed and comfortable sportive riders' option. That is probably why I like mine so much.

willbevan

pneumatic wrote:

I've test ridden a Comp and I own an Expert.

Notice any difference on the frames, as there different carbon arn't they, comp i think is 6r and expert and pro are 8r (presuming its this years, as i was just looking at an 06 pro thats 6r)

pneumatic

These were 06 models and I think they were both the same, frame-wise, it was the drivetrain that was different.

BTW My test-ride was through the East end of Glasgow. I asked at the bike shop for route advice and the guy just said, "don't stop!" However, despite being astride 2+ grands worth of brand new bike, I felt confident that the bike was zippy enough to outrun anything intimidating.

gkerr4

I went through the same decision process in January - went for the roubaix in the end.

I really wanted a carbon version of the allez / langster which I already have - but you can't have that - you either go for the tarmac which has a 10mm shorter head tube and slightly more agressive geometry - or the roubaix which has a 10mm higher head-tube and slightly less aggressive geometry.

i just thought that the slightly more comfortable position was more useful for me as i have no intention of racing.

I went for a self build in the end - an S-Works roubaix with campag centaur carbon groupset and camag eurus wheels - it is very light and very very comfy. It doesn't acept a 13-tooth rear sprocket - but thats a whole long story!

willbevan

gkerr4 wrote:

I went for a self build in the end - an S-Works roubaix with campag centaur carbon groupset and camag eurus wheels - it is very light and very very comfy. It doesn't acept a 13-tooth rear sprocket - but thats a whole long story!

I am thinking about a self build with the s-works roubaix frame as well, the cost of the SL2 tarmac frame sort of puts me off that idea for a tarmac though :S as 400 quid difference is like. em no!

Mind if i ask the story of the 13T sprocjket ?

gkerr4

don't mind you asking at all

it;s all here:
http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtop ... ight=frame


the short version is - it doesn't fit but specialized's customer service is second to none!

personally I think that the roubaix is the frame to have if you are not racing - the tarmac is a race bike and the roubaix is for mere mortals - the only other reason i can think of taking the tarmac over a roubaix is vanity.

They aren't that much different - get the two frames side by side and the feel very similar - just that 20mm on the headtube and the odd half degree here and there.

andy_wrx

I've got a '06 Roubaix Comp which I bought ex-demo from a shop and it's a real bitsa - full Ultegra rather than 105/Ultegra mix, Cinelli bars & stem, Fulcrum wheels, SWorks seatpost, etc

As part of this, they cut-down the steerer and removed all the spacers under the stem - including that big dome thing.
The front end is now not high at all, is actually lower at the front than my Allez.

So if the only difference between Tarmac and Roubaix were 20mm on the headtube - you can easily get that the same by running the Tarmac with the full set of spacers it comes with and taking some of them off the Roubaix.

In practice, do people actually remove these spacers ?
How many Trek Madones have you seen where there's 3 or 4 cm of spacers under the stem, like they came from the shop ?
I reckon either most people like it like that or perhaps they simply leave them and ride it like it came...

As for the other Roubaix/Tarmac geometry differences like fork angle and trail, chainstay length, etc, the '£1500 superbike review' in C+ this month seems to be saying that the Tarmac is fairly soft and forgiving, not a twitchy all-or-nothing full-in-yer-face racebike, that it's more a gentle introduction that won't put novices off and the compact chainset with 11-28 cassette makes it ideal for sportives...