# How much smoother is the Roubaix ride?



## bigskychuck (Jul 14, 2008)

I'm considering the 2014 Roubaix Expert and Tarmac SL4 Expert. 

I like the looks of the Tarmac more, but Specialized touts the Roubaix as being a smoother riding endurance bike that might be more comfortable to ride. I ride long endurance rides, with a lot of climbing (think Death Ride), sometimes against the clock (think LOTOJA). I haven't been able to ride both as my LBS doesn't have the 2014's yet. 

Can anyone comment on whether the ride is truly smoother?

Thanks


----------



## Typetwelve (Jul 1, 2012)

bigskychuck said:


> I'm considering the 2014 Roubaix Expert and Tarmac SL4 Expert.
> 
> I like the looks of the Tarmac more, but Specialized touts the Roubaix as being a smoother riding endurance bike that might be more comfortable to ride. I ride long endurance rides, with a lot of climbing (think Death Ride), sometimes against the clock (think LOTOJA). I haven't been able to ride both as my LBS doesn't have the 2014's yet.
> 
> ...


Well...that's a loaded question I guess.

I spent last year on a 2009 SL2 Roubaix...and this year on a 2012 SL2 Tarmac.

When it comes to pure "bump for bump" ride quality, the Roubaix wins hands down...then again the Tarmac feels more connected and lively.

I feel the larger issue between the two bikes is the geometry of the frame. Do this, go to Specialized and open up a window of the Tarmac, then in another tab, the Roubaix. Click back and forth between the two and look at the difference. The differences are small but in the world of cycling, small differences go a long way. The wheel base is longer on the Roubaix, the head tube is longer on the Roubaix and the seating position more upright. These subtle differences make a big difference in how they ride.

Now...some will say you can change the "fit" to make the seating position more aggressive on a Roubaix but a fact is, you cannot change the frame and that's where the differences are.



Now...with that aside...my opinions.

I went with a Tarmac because I wanted a more aggressive ride. I have more time to pound out fast 20-25 miles rides than I do a century. I'm not saying the Roubaix isn't fast or the Tarmac cannot be taken to distance...I'm saying they aren't in their element in those roles. Truth be told, winter of 2014-15 I'm saving $$ to get a Roubaix as I really want both. I'm not regretting the decision to get a Tarmac as I adore riding the thing, if I could only own one, I feel I made the right choice. On the other hand, the Roubaix is a great bike and super smooth, I loved riding the thing and my ass/body really does miss it on the longer rides, that's for sure. That's why I'm going to get one. Either way, they are different bikes and you're going to have to decide what you want I guess...just don't let anyone tell you there is little difference between the two...


----------



## spdntrxi (Jul 25, 2013)

I dont think there is that much difference between the 14 and 13's... so ride the 13's if you have to. My wife road the Amira and Ruby and preferred the Ruby.. which was nice for my pocket book... but I liked the S-Works Amira personally, but hey it's her bike. I think if I was going to do mostly long rides I might choose the Roubaix over the Tarmac...but agree with the earlier poster about liking the looks of the more aggressive bikes.


----------



## Dunbar (Aug 8, 2010)

I can say that the Zertz inserts do work in my experience. I've only ever owned road bikes with endurance geometries so I can't speak to the handling versus the Tarmac (I have long-ish legs so I need the tall head tube.) The difference in head tube length is 20mm so unless you have short legs, or prefer huge amounts of saddle-to-bar drop, you should be able to set both bikes up the same from a fit perspective. The Cobble Gobbler seat post can be added to the Tarmac if you want a little more compliance (and don't mind the looks.)


----------



## bigskychuck (Jul 14, 2008)

Thanks for the input, folks. 

The 2013's are gone at the shop, but I did get to ride a 2013 Tarmac, mostly up some big hills, and loved it, right before it sold. I've now ridden a 2014 Roubaix, and it is indeed a smooth ride.

I live in Salt Lake City and do a lot of canyon riding (3 Death Rides and the Pikes Peak hill climb over the last 6 yrs), and remember the Tarmac feeling especially good going up hill. 

I'm 6 foot, 175 lbs, and on a 58 the top tube clearance is not an issue. The shop has told me they can set a Tarmac up to my fit (my fit includes raising the stem as I've had neck surgery), though I can see where the taller headtube on the Roubaix may be beneficial, and how the longer wheelbase and greater BB drop would make the ride smoother.

I guess they won't have a 2014 Tarmac for me to try until November. I'm sure I'll need to wait until I can compare them back to back (even if it's snowy when I get to do so!).


----------



## Bosock (Apr 1, 2012)

I have rode a Roubaix SL3 S-works and Tarmac SL3 S-works and there are differences. First and foremost...the position on the Roubaix is more laxed...you can make it more aggressive...but you will be challenged to get it as aggressive as the Tarmac. You sit up more on the Roubaix and on longer rides, pending your condition, that is helpful in centuries and fondo's. From the Expert level up the Roubaix is also very stiff yet very comfortable...you crank them and they are responsive and take off. I personally believe the older 8r frames ride is a little smoother but no where near as stiff. The position and stiffness of the bike make it ideal for sitting in the saddle climbing...and the bike will climb...if you like sitting and climbing it is very hard to beat as it is comfortable and yet stiff where it needs to be. The Roubaix is also a very stable ride when descending but not the quickest in the turns.

Tarmac more aggressive position...you can work it with stems and such...but it is still a more aggressive positioned bike. Very stiff and not as smooth ride as the Roubaix...but if you like road feedback it provides it. The more aggressive position encourages more out of saddle time in climbs and sprints. Bike is stiff and very responsive...however, to be honest both bikes are very stiff and responsive and if you can noodle the Roubaix or the Tarmac your impressive. What the Tarmac gives up to the Roubaix in comfort it makes up with in handling. The bike turns on a dime and the handling is great...a little racy feeling...some say twitchy but I don't believe so...however, I live in SLC area as well and have come down immigration, big cottonwood, and millcreek and I went up equally well on both...descending though I flew down much faster on the Tarmac and felt far more confident on the way down. The Roubaix's longer profile makes you work it a tad in fast tight turns were the tarmac allows you to cut through them at much fast speeds.

So having both and have ridden both I can pretty much confirm what the others have told you. Roubaix is a very good performing comfort bike and the Tarmac is a good handling race bike. You just have to decide which is more important...coming down those canyons at faster speeds or after those centuries and fondo's feeling far more refreshed...cuz after about 50 miles that positioning and comfort of the Roubaix has shielded you to the point you still relatively refreshed and eager to go...pending your condition you start feeling the ride on the Tarmac. Sounds like you have tested them both...probably at this point you already know which feel you like best. No matter which you pick...both great bikes...and if you ride it a ton you made the right decision...good luck on making your pick.


----------

