Tarmac vs Roubaix.

syncro
syncro Posts: 120
edited July 2010 in Road buying advice
Any one ridden a Specialized Tarmac and Roubaix? Much difference in comfort? I assume either would be quite a bit better than my Aluminium Trek 1.5, just wondered about any opinions.

Comments

  • Buckled_Rims
    Buckled_Rims Posts: 1,648
    The Tarmac Elite has just been tested and reported here. Quite a bad mark

    http://www.bikeradar.com/road/gear/category/bikes/road/product/tarmac-elite-10-37907

    Yet the Tarmac Comp gets great ratings.

    http://www.bikeradar.com/gear/category/bikes/road/product/tarmac-comp-10-37672
    CAAD9
    Kona Jake the Snake
    Merlin Malt 4
  • brin
    brin Posts: 1,122
    The Tarmac is more of a racing equipped bike, whereas the Roubaix is more for endurance, hence more of a comfortable ride, altho everyone's different. Ask to try both before deciding.
  • carrock
    carrock Posts: 1,103
    Buckled_Rims wrote:
    The Tarmac Elite has just been tested and reported here. Quite a bad mark

    http://www.bikeradar.com/road/gear/category/bikes/road/product/tarmac-elite-10-37907

    Yet the Tarmac Comp gets great ratings.

    http://www.bikeradar.com/gear/category/bikes/road/product/tarmac-comp-10-37672

    Strange as the only difference between these 2 bikes is the wheels and brakes- everything else is identical
  • softlad
    softlad Posts: 3,513
    carrock wrote:

    Strange as the only difference between these 2 bikes is the wheels and brakes- everything else is identical

    just goes to show that reviewers' opinions are largely meaningless - not to mention useless....
  • Harry182
    Harry182 Posts: 1,170
    IIRC the geometries of the two are significantly different. The Tarmac has pretty traditional 'race' geometry while the Roubaix's is slacker,longer and has a taller headtube.

    Edit - Oops. Misread the previous posts. Didn't realise we'd deviated from the OP.
  • syncro
    syncro Posts: 120
    Judging by the comments about the review of the Tarmac the reviewer doesn't seem to know what he's talking about.
    I mean seriously, 2 stars?!
  • northpole
    northpole Posts: 1,499
    The geometries are substantially different and you can expect to sit more upright on the Roubaix - should help for those with less flexibility/ lower back issues. The Roubaix also has a more compliant frame with Zertz inserts which are meant to act as shock absorbers.

    My suspicion is that you will only be able to tell how significantly different they are if you can borrow from your dealer and take each for a decent ride. No clue how many shops are willing/ able to lay on such facilities, but that's your best way to find out.

    Peter
  • keef66
    keef66 Posts: 13,123
    I'm now even more suspicious the Zerts are just a marketing gimmick; in the latest incarnation of the frame they are just bolting them on!

    I've read loads of reviews from owners who think the tarmac gives a very comfortable ride. I think unless you hear from someone who owns both, or has ridden both, you really need to test ride them back to back.
  • nicholasj
    nicholasj Posts: 100
    I have a Tarmac, I upgraded from a Spesh Allez earlier this year - it's a great bike, really noticeable difference over aluminium and i find it quite comfortable even for a "race" bike.

    i did try out a roubaix, and i did agree with my LBS that it was a little too soft for what i was after.

    i dont find the ride too harsh, and the difference when climbing of hammering on the power with the smile it gives you far outweighs any feel of the road that may come through.

    i use the bike on sportives and longer rides - definately no gripes from me.
  • syncro
    syncro Posts: 120
    nicholasj wrote:
    I have a Tarmac, I upgraded from a Spesh Allez earlier this year - it's a great bike, really noticeable difference over aluminium and i find it quite comfortable even for a "race" bike.

    i did try out a roubaix, and i did agree with my LBS that it was a little too soft for what i was after.

    i dont find the ride too harsh, and the difference when climbing of hammering on the power with the smile it gives you far outweighs any feel of the road that may come through.

    i use the bike on sportives and longer rides - definitely no gripes from me.

    Hmmm, thats sort of what i wanted to hear. I sort of got the impression that a carbon frame would probably be more comfortable anyway that aluminium and i can do more than 70 miles on my Trek 1.5 without much discomfort. The guy in the shop seemed to be steering me towards the Tarmac as he thought the Roubaix might be a bit 'soft'.
    Plus the Tarmac is one of very few bikes that dont come with a compact chainset which is a plus for me.
    Thanks nicholasj i think youmay have made my mind up for me.
  • milese
    milese Posts: 1,233
    I've got a Tarmac and love it.

    My other bike is a Giant SCR 1.0 which has quite relaxed geometry, but I dont find the Tarmac to be any less comfortable.

    It really depends on how flexible / prone to sore neck / back are you. I bought mine used off a guy who sold it after 2 rides because it was too uncomfortable for him, but he did say he had an accident which damaged his back.

    I use my Tarmac for long rides and Sportives.
  • syncro
    syncro Posts: 120
    I did suffer a bit from sore neck and back but I think that's me getting used to the position. As the mileage has gone up the problem has become less.
  • drewfromrisca
    drewfromrisca Posts: 1,165
    I have a Tarmac Pro SL which I just upgraded from an Expert which I had for 3 years. A great bike, very comfortable, smooth, corners well and climbs lovely.
    I find it has an aggressive geometry (which is what I like) and feels...how can I explain...short when on the drops, as if your really low and down and in full attack mode (note to self never apply for a job as a bike reviewer).

    I've ridden it on club rides, chain gangs, sportives but not raced on it yet although I'm not frightened to.

    All in all a really fantastic bike but another man's meat is another man's poison. Try and test ride them and see for yourself.
    There is never redemption, any fool can regret yesterday...

    Be Pure! Be Vigilant! Behave!
  • andy_wrx
    andy_wrx Posts: 3,396
    I don't think the Tarmac is that agressive - compared to when it originally came-out, the headtube is now longer and the geometry is softened a bit.

    The S-works is different, but the Comp/Elite/etc geometries aren't that full-on and so it's perfectly approachable and useable as a fast long-distance bike, not something that only 22-year-old superfit racers could buy.
  • syncro
    syncro Posts: 120
    andy_wrx wrote:

    The S-works is different, but the Comp/Elite/etc geometries aren't that full-on and so it's perfectly approachable and useable as a fast long-distance bike, not something that only 22-year-old superfit racers could buy.

    Good job, i'm a bit older than 22! :lol:

    Certainly sounds like a Tarmac Elite could be just what i'm after.
  • richardfj
    richardfj Posts: 91
    Hi,

    I've been looking at Tarmac Comp and a Moda Stretto: one retails for £1899 the other for £1999 so they are comparable in price but the stretto seemingly has superior spec. I have a Specilaised at the moment but my LBS says that there is no comparison between them ie he believes that the stretto is far superior....

    I've heard good things about the stretto but there's still no pro reviews in any mags or website and it's from a new company whereas tarmac comp is tried and tested..

    I've now arranged to test ride both bikes on monday to compare them ( as best i can) and will report back if anyone interested, i'll probably check out the roubaix as well..

Categories