# Specialized or Cervelo ?



## tanner3155 (Apr 5, 2008)

Hi guys. Just looking for some input for Specialized Tarmac vs. Roubaix vs. Cervelo R3 or RS.

Which do you prefer and why? Thanks very much.

Mike


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

Are you asking for input on Tarmac versus R3 separately from Roubaix versus RS, or are you simply asking for input on any or all four? I ask this because the Tarmac and R3 are race bikes and the Roubaix and RS are relaxed geo bikes. Slightly different uses, IMO.


----------



## tanner3155 (Apr 5, 2008)

I would like input on all, however, I guess the bottom line might be.................
which bike would have the overall best combination of performance and comfort.

I am surrounded by hills and wish to do centuries as well.


----------



## rosborn (May 10, 2009)

Well, as PJ352 stated . . . . the Tarmac and the R3 are similar and the Roubaix and the RS are similar. They are all race bikes and can all be configured to be more comfortable or more race oriented depending upon what you want. All of these bikes are used in races by professional teams and all of these bikes are used by non-professionals in everything from daily training rides to centuries.

So, to answer your question - any one of these bikes would offer a great combination of performance and comfort. Equally, any one of these bikes will perform well on hills and in centuries. In the end, it comes down to which bike is more comfortable to YOU.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

tanner3155 said:


> I would like input on all, however, I guess the bottom line might be.................
> *which bike would have the overall best combination of performance and comfort.*
> 
> I am surrounded by hills and wish to do centuries as well.


_Highly _subjective. How anyone answers is going to be based on their experiences, fitness, personal preferences, bike fit, style and type(s) of riding, terrain/ road conditions, among other factors. 

I would say Tarmac, but I'm sure some will say Roubaix, while still others will say RS. Given my experiences with the R3, I can't imagine someone using the word _comfort _to describe the ride, yet some members have posted saying the same.

Best way to answer your question is to test ride them, preferably back to back with the same wheels/ tires and pressures. A tall order given most peoples circumstances, but IMO that is the ideal. Next best is to take a day and set up test rides with the respective dealers. IME the longer time elapses between rides, the more memory fades.


----------



## tanner3155 (Apr 5, 2008)

Ok, I was thinking the final answer would be the ride, however, I'm findind dificulities finding a shop that will let you take the Cervelo for more than just down the block.
There is a specialized dealer ( Palos Verdes cycling center) that will let me have both the Roubaix and Tarmac for the day. I could take each one through the whole 26 mile PV loop.
I guess I'll just have to hope I can get a feel for the R3 just taking it around the block. Was hoping to do some serious hills and distance.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

tanner3155 said:


> Ok, I was thinking the final answer would be the ride, however, *I'm findind dificulities finding a shop that will let you take the Cervelo for more than just down the block.*
> There is a specialized dealer ( Palos Verdes cycling center) that will let me have both the Roubaix and Tarmac for the day. I could take each one through the whole 26 mile PV loop.
> I guess I'll just have to hope I can get a feel for the R3 just taking it around the block. Was hoping to do some serious hills and distance.


I'll tell you upfront that I'm not a Cervelo fan, but that aside and objectively speaking, if I had a dealer near me that had similar restrictions on test rides, they wouldn't be my bike shop.

Just a FYI... My R3 test ride came before I formed the negative opinion, so that didn't color my ride impressions in any way.


----------



## j-man (Sep 3, 2009)

never ridden a cervelo or a roubaix, but if you get the tarmac you won't be dissapointed. you can set any bike to be more relaxed or aggressive, all im saying is just because something is considered a "race bike" doesn't mean you have ride that way


----------



## WhyRun (Dec 29, 2008)

and 700x25 tires will soften up any ride.

Remember without the same wheels and tire pressure, its going to be difficult to do a straight comparison just riding the stock bikes. Although if you intend to keep the bike stock, going with whichever is most comfortable as-is would work too...


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

j-man said:


> never ridden a cervelo or a roubaix, but if you get the tarmac you won't be dissapointed. *you can set any bike to be more relaxed or aggressive*, all im saying is just because something is considered a "race bike" doesn't mean you have ride that way


Comfort-wise, to a point, but all else being equal the inherent differences in geo will dictate that the bikes will remain what they are.


----------



## icsloppl (Aug 25, 2009)

2010 Tarmac. It descends more predictably and has overall better high speed handling. The Cervelos are typically suspect in this area, particularly in the larger sizes in my experience.

The expert is the best value IMO.


----------



## rosborn (May 10, 2009)

PJ352 said:


> I'll tell you upfront that I'm not a Cervelo fan, but that aside and objectively speaking, if I had a dealer near me that had similar restrictions on test rides, they wouldn't be my bike shop.
> 
> Just a FYI... My R3 test ride came before I formed the negative opinion, so that didn't color my ride impressions in any way.


Just curious, why no love for Cervelo?


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

rosborn said:


> Just curious, why no love for Cervelo?


To avoid derailing this thread or coloring the OP's opinions, I'll PM my response.


----------



## tanner3155 (Apr 5, 2008)

Ok, I went to two different Surf City Cyclery shops in order to test all 4 bikes. The RS is hard to find. Here's my conclusions so far......

Rode 4 bikes.
Tarmac Expert
R3
Roubaix expert
Rs

After riding the four bikes, I'm down to 2. The Tarmac Expert and the RS.
The R3 was very snappy but too harsh and squirrely. The Roubaix was very comfortable, but a little too sluggish. The RS and the Tarmac both felt comfortable and snappy.
The RS actually felt like it took off better than the Tarmac, but not by much, but the Tarmac had a slightly better (taller) body geometry going on. So, it's gonna be a close one. Tarmac on sale for $3000. RS on sale for $3500


----------



## Zampano (Aug 7, 2005)

tanner3155 said:


> The R3 was very snappy but too harsh and squirrely.



Out of curiosity, what do you mean by squirrely? Is the frontend geo too quick for your preference, or is the frame flexing in the turns?


----------



## rosborn (May 10, 2009)

tanner3155 said:


> The Roubaix was very comfortable, but a little too sluggish.


Yeah . . . . Tell that to Tom Boonen or Fabian Cancellara, both of whom won Paris-Roubaix (Cancellara in going away fashion) on the Roubaix. In fact, I believe Cancellara won by the largest margin ever this year, beating the Cervelo Test Team riders, on Cervelo RS bikes, by nearly 3 minutes. If that's sluggish I'll take it any day.


----------



## Dr_John (Oct 11, 2005)

Somehow I don't think tanner was test riding a Roubaix SL3 prototype. Keep in mind Boonen and Cancellera are paid a lot of money to ride Specialized Roubaixs in the Paris-Roubaix. I suspect Cancellera would have done as well on any top-of-the-line road bike. His previous win of that race was on a ... Cervelo.

I own a Tarmac and a Roubaix. They're very different bikes. To me, the Roubaix is less responsive in handling, so some might say sluggish. It's not that I'm not winning crits on my Tarmac, while I end up wheelsucking on my Roubaix - but it's quite noticeable to even me.

There's nothing wrong with the Roubaix. I probably have over 15K miles on mine. I just enjoy riding my Tarmac more. And that's what Tanner needs to decide, however he differentiates the rides.


----------



## rosborn (May 10, 2009)

The Tarmac and the Roubaix are different bikes. I've owned and ridden both. Granted, my bikes were at the Comp level but I didn't notice "that" much of a difference in handling, during the test ride, to be able to qualify one as as "snappy" and the other as "sluggish". Over time the differences were noticeable but not so much during the test ride. What I did notice during the test ride was the more upright riding position of the Roubaix over that of the Tarmac. I question Tanner's evaluation, more particularly, when comparing the Roubaix versus the RS. 

Though I haven't ridden the RS personally I know at least six guys, more experienced riders than I am, who have both and they told me that there was no difference between the two bikes (Roubaix Expert versus the RS - comparable level bikes) in responsiveness. Mind you, a couple of these guys purchased the RS because there were/are fewer of them on the road in Southeast Michigan. This was pretty important to me last Summer as I was in the market for a new road bike and had decided on purchasing either the RS or the Roubaix. Since they didn't notice a difference in the two bikes and no dealers in my area carried the size RS I needed (58 cm) I "settled" for the Roubaix and couldn't be happier.

To each his own.

FWIW, Cervelo Test Team weren't riding stock RS bikes either. I doubt their bikes had Shimano Ultegra components on them - like the rest of us can buy. Additionally, the frames aren't exactly what you can buy in a regular bike shop. So, each company tweeked the bikes for the race which doesn't negate what I wrote previously.


----------



## tanner3155 (Apr 5, 2008)

Allow me to try and be a little more clear. I test rode them back to back. One right after the other. "Snappy" and "sluggish" are just words I happened to pull out of the air to try and describe the difference. Perhaps more appropriate words could have been chosen, I dunno. However, the Roubaix was a little more comfortable. It fit MY geometry a tad better. How you quantify the difference I don't know. But I noticed a difference. Also, when I got out of the saddle and punched it, the RS shot forward a little quicker it seemed. Calling the Roubaix sluggish is only relative to that experience with the RS. 

Both bikes are amazing and I'm sure I'd be happy with either. But, this one time test ride experience left me impressed with the Tarmac and the RS. What confounds me is that they are different machines. I was expecting to either like the Tarmac/R3 or the Roubaix/RS.


----------



## tanner3155 (Apr 5, 2008)

It was so responsive I wasn't used to it. Just seemed very sensitive to everything. I remember when I got out of the saddle it felt like I was going to drop it. It would bite really hard. Seemed like maybe it is meant for a lighter rider. I'm 190 ish.


----------



## tanner3155 (Apr 5, 2008)

Thanks, I will keep this in mind on the final test ride between the two, which will be for the 2011 models. Thanks


----------



## Dr_John (Oct 11, 2005)

> FWIW, Cervelo Test Team weren't riding stock RS bikes either.


Actually, to be accurate, they were on modified R3's, not RS's. Here's a nice article on Thor's:

http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/pro-bike-thor-hushovds-cervlo-r3-paris-roubaix-25692

As I've said many times before, you can and many others do win races on a Roubaix, and centuries+ are very do-able on a Tarmac - I do it all the time. All are good bikes. It's whichever best fits your riding style. I thought I 'needed' a Roubaix, me being an old man, not racing, long rides, etc. After a few years I switched to a Tarmac, which I love. I still occasionally ride my Roubaix, but given the choice, I'll always grab my Tarmac.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

tanner3155 said:


> Allow me to try and be a little more clear. I test rode them back to back. One right after the other. "Snappy" and "sluggish" are just words I happened to pull out of the air to try and describe the difference. Perhaps more appropriate words could have been chosen, I dunno. However, the Roubaix was a little more comfortable. It fit MY geometry a tad better. How you quantify the difference I don't know. But I noticed a difference. Also, when I got out of the saddle and punched it, the RS shot forward a little quicker it seemed. Calling the Roubaix sluggish is only relative to that experience with the RS.
> 
> Both bikes are amazing and I'm sure I'd be happy with either. But, *this one time test ride experience left me impressed with the Tarmac and the RS. What confounds me is that they are different machines.* I was expecting to either like the Tarmac/R3 or the Roubaix/RS.


Actually, I'm not that surprised. If you compare the geo of the Roubaix, Tarmac and RS, you'll see that there are more similarities than differences between the Tarmac and RS. The Roubaix, OTOH does lean slightly more towards relaxed. 

For example, using a 56cm for comparison, front center on the Tarmac is 591mm's, the RS's 593mm's, while the Roubaix's is 606. Chainstays on the Tarmac are 405mm's, RS's 410 and Roubaix's 415. HTA on the Tarmac is 73.5, rake is 43. RS's is 73 and rake is 53, but trail between the two bikes is within 2mm's. They just use slightly different methods to get there. Roubaix's HTA is the slackest at 72.5, but shares the 43mm rake on the Tarmac, so trail stays close at 56mm's. HT lengths are 170, 180, 190. Tarmac, RS, Roubaix, respectively. 

The numbers tend to confuse, but if you notice, the RS is consistently closer to the Tarmac than the Roubaix. I'm not drawing any conclusions on ride/ handling other than to say that geo does dictate handling, and to some extent, ride.

Since you started out with 4 candidates and are now down to a possble two, I suggest riding those two again, as close to back to back as possible and preferably for longer durations. During those rides something might become apparent to you about the ride/ handling of one that either tilts the scales in its favor it pushes it out of the running. IME ride/ handling impressions are highly subjective, so only you can decide which bike is the best one for you.


----------



## tanner3155 (Apr 5, 2008)

I suggest riding those two again, as close to back to back as possible and preferably for longer durations.

Yes, this is exactly what I plan to do. To just ride and feel. Hopefully something will become very apparent. 

Thanks


----------

