# Venge or Tarmac . . .



## SCrowley94 (Apr 16, 2012)

Just wondering, kinda torn between the two of these, I'm 6' even and 74kg, I race competitively, climb well, descend OK, and can push 40kmh pretty easy for 2 hours on flat, and thats where my problem lies. Anyone out there with experience of these two bikes, can they tell me which is better for my type of rider? Does the venge climb better than other aero bikes, eg, a Cervelo S5, and how does the Tarmac hold up in a sprint? (Not compared to the Venge, just a general, fast finishing sprint.) Is guess the main thing that will sell me on one or the other is: Does the Venge climb better than the Tarmac sprints? Also, is the S Works Venge much heavier than an S Works Tarmac SL4? Thanks


----------



## NealH (May 2, 2004)

I want to say the Venge is a little more suited to sprinting and flat land riding, especially when you pull a lot. But in reality, I suspect the Venge is the preferred bike if you are a competitive racer. Otherwise, the Tarmac will likely be the preferred bike (though preference still plays a stung role). 

Climbing should be the same for all practical purposes. Descending is where you might see a difference. The slight extra compliance of the Tarmac should give it the advantage when descending in anything other than near perfect tarmac. It will be less skidd'ish. On smooth tarmac however, the Venge should rule the descending venue.

I see the Venge as a more purpose constructed bike - when every second is important. I see the Tarmac as the more everyday and every terrain type bike. Put some Zipp 404's on for those fast rides on flat terrain, ten change to DA 7900 C24 wheels for everything else.


----------



## SCrowley94 (Apr 16, 2012)

Yeah I was leaning more towards the venge (speed, looks, etc) but I was concerned about the climbing, I read in some reviews that it didn't climb well at all. But thats reassuring, that it climbs almost as good as a Tarmac. Unless I hear seriously bad things about it methinks I'm buying a Venge!


----------



## cannastar (Dec 12, 2011)

I race draft-legal tris, given the option of a SW Venge or Tarmac and went for the Tarmac. I simply enjoyed being on the Tarmac more, the venge would suit my style of racing but since 95%+ of the time I'm on the bike I'm training I was able to justify the slight performance trade-off

The Tarmac is stiffer, lighter and more comfortable. The Venge is more aero, less stiff (slightly less than an SW SL3) and less compliant. 

The venge is ideally suited for flat terrain where you will be taking lots of wind (e.g. breakaways, rouleur, crits). I think spesh claim a 25watt reduction at 40km/h.


----------



## T0mi (Mar 2, 2011)

SCrowley94 said:


> Yeah I was leaning more towards the venge (speed, looks, etc) but I was concerned about the climbing, I read in some reviews that it didn't climb well at all. But thats reassuring, that it climbs almost as good as a Tarmac. Unless I hear seriously bad things about it methinks I'm buying a Venge!


If you are competitive, you should now that a bike doesn't climb. You are doing the climbing. It's not about the bike ability to climb or not but about comfort. From the reviews, it looks like the Venge is a very stiff bike. Comfort is a big issue for some riders/racers, other can ride a very stiff bike for hours without problems. It's all about the head and the legs.

What do you currently ride ? What do you like or dislike about your current bike ? What are you looking for in a new bike ? And makes you think you definitely need a specialized and not another brand ?

Those are the question you need to answer to choose your next bike.


----------



## flafonta (Sep 15, 2008)

I was in a similar position a few weeks ago. Ended up buying the Venge (not ready yet).

Was debating between the Cannondale Evo and the Venge. Tried both for 50 mile rides, using the same wheels (303) with the exact same pressure (digital gauge), 2 days apart. Both felt great, and in the end, I went with my heart. I did feel something special with the Venge at speed (most likely placebo  ). The Evo was very, very nice as well. But my heart was already set on the Venge.

If you don't go with your heart, you will always have some regrets, lusting over the other one.

So I would suggest you try both if you can, and then go with your heart.


----------



## philbennett (Jan 20, 2012)

Havent ridden tarmac but my venge is not a particularly harsh ride, that's way overblown....i routinely do 60-70 mile training rides and have no fatigue issues. the sw sl3 was incredibly stiff, and the venge, being close to that, is more than stiff enough for sprints (as many have said, there is just one word to invoke at this point: Cavendish).
Which one is faster? theyre probably about the same unless you do a ton out front by yourself, in which case clearly the venge, or you make all your money climbing, in which case tarmac... 
In the real world, unless you are heavily biased on the scale, waaay down at the breakaway artist/and/or sprinter end of the spectrum or waaay down at the climbing specialist on the other think you can mainly put aside the relatively small differences between the two in weight (my 54cm was 1060grams) and performance. The most honest approach for the average rider is probablby just personal taste. They both look great to me, but the venge is just off the chart, it wasn't a hard choice.
Props to spesh. You can make a carbon bike all kinds of shapes and there is just no excuse for bland or ugly.


----------



## martinot (Aug 14, 2009)

My team has a discount on all Specialized bikes and I'd say all but 1 guys have picked the Tarmac - not sure why but the general consensus is that Tarmac is more universal meaning hills, rollers, sprints and kermesses too. The guys that are on tarmac (including Cat 1 and 2 racers) absolutely love it, I did the winter training camp with the Venge owner and he loved it too (his was electronic Ultegra version). Within the tarmac pack one person is on a SL4 PRO and everyone else is on SL4 S-Works. If it was me I'd try to get a test rides at first and then would put my impressions together against the price and look of the frames. Best of ....


----------



## tdietz87 (Apr 19, 2011)

SCrowley94 said:


> Just wondering, kinda torn between the two of these, I'm 6' even and 74kg, I race competitively, climb well, descend OK, and can push 40kmh pretty easy for 2 hours on flat, and thats where my problem lies. Anyone out there with experience of these two bikes, can they tell me which is better for my type of rider? Does the venge climb better than other aero bikes, eg, a Cervelo S5, and how does the Tarmac hold up in a sprint? (Not compared to the Venge, just a general, fast finishing sprint.) Is guess the main thing that will sell me on one or the other is: Does the Venge climb better than the Tarmac sprints? Also, is the S Works Venge much heavier than an S Works Tarmac SL4? Thanks


Velonews May 2012 has tested 2012 aero road bikes. Obviously the subjective handling/comfort ratings are well, subjective. But the tunnel results and torsional results are interesting.


----------



## T K (Feb 11, 2009)

Specialized is evil. They put secret spy cameras and tracking devices in all of their bikes. Avoid them at all cost.
They also think you will die before their tires. Evil I tell you. Evil.


----------

