# Specialized Roubaix v Colnago



## Tarbaby09 (Jun 18, 2009)

I can get a Specialized Roubaix Expert and Colnago CLX through local stores. Can anyone tell me what differences there are between the two bikes - by that I mean are there differences in compliance that you or others know exist. They are both ultegra specced bikes except that the Colnago has a FSA carbon crank I believe.
Any common thoughts about these two 'endurance' bikes......cheers


----------



## JulesYK (Jul 2, 2007)

I had a 2005 Roubaix Comp and currently ride a CLX. There's no comparison in terms of handling (CLX much better), and no meaningful difference in comfort on reasonable roads. That said, I'm sure that the current Roubaix models are better in the handling department with stiffer front ends than the 2005 models, but that was thing I immediately noticed when I made the switch. With the Roubaix, I was had to really push the bike into corners, whereas the Colnago just goes. The CLX feels snappier, but I doubt that there is a real difference in speed/acceleration.


----------



## NealH (May 2, 2004)

Pretty much the same with the Tarmac. I have an SL2 Tarmac and, and SL2 Roubaix. While the ride smoothness is better on the Roubaix, it is just marginally better. On decent road surfaces, there really isn't much difference at all. On rough surfaces the Roubaix is just slightly smoother. Its platform is still pretty stiff and it climbs well. 

The strength of the Roubaix is that it is an easy bike to handle. It exudes a more relaxed feel to it. And you can run bigger tires. Over long distances these small difference begin to add up. It doesn't require quite the focused attention that the Tarmac does. 

The Tarmac is sharp, composed, and quick. It responds instantly and tracks exactly where you point it without delay. The steering feel is very confident. The Roubaix might feel just a bit numb or muted in steering, though both are stable as a rock. The Tarmac feels livelier than the Roubaix. 

Both good bikes. I often struggle deciding which to ride.


----------



## JulesYK (Jul 2, 2007)

*Tire Size Capacity with CLX*



NealH said:


> The strength of the Roubaix is that it is an easy bike to handle. It exudes a more relaxed feel to it. And you can run bigger tires.


The fact that you can run bigger tires on the Roubaix may be an important point. On the CLX (the 07 model, at least), no way you can use anything larger than a 23mm tire. And even that is a fairly tight fit. I have a different bike when I need to run something larger so it's not an issue for me, but could be for others.


----------



## Tarbaby09 (Jun 18, 2009)

JulesYK..thanks for that comment re tyres. I hadnt thought of that. Yes, 25's are a bit heavier but are a good option for longer rides.

Looks as if the Colnago is a bit snappier but the local shop doesn't have one in my size as we have found I'd need a size smaller so maybe it will be the Roubaix Expert that gets the nod with the coin. So difficult to make a decision as other posts have alluded to.


----------



## jhamlin38 (Oct 29, 2005)

I currently own a tarmac pro sl and use a 25 rear tire. Its the perfect fit for me as the headtube is a bit longer for a more upright position. It handles extremely well and corners on rails. It takes a bit more effort to maintain a perfectly, arrow straight line, bit is by no means twitchy. 
The roubaix will give you an even more upright position, which you may desire. But if you want to get lower as your fitness improves, it'll be more difficult. 
The Colnago will give the same rail like cornering, have a short wheelbase and chainstay for snappier acceleration, like a tarmac. The Nago will also have a lively character to it that's difficult to describe, because its a colnago.


----------

