# Roubaix Sizing Help???



## BrianT (Oct 12, 2004)

I apologize in advance for the somewhat generic question, but I'm hoping someone out there can provide me with some first-hand knowledge / experience.

I'm looking at the Specialized Roubaix and I'm trying to determine which size makes the most sense for me. In the past I've owned two Specialized Tarmacs (see the Specialized picture thread for photos ... I don't even want to get into the pain that selling them caused ... look at the photos and you'll understand). Anyway, those were both 56cm bikes and they each had a 565mm top tube. On both bikes I ran a 120mm stem. I always felt like these bikes fit right - I had no fit issues or complaints.

I've always been taught that the top tube length is the key, everything else is much less important. That said, the more relaxed geometry of the Roubaix series of bikes has me wondering if I should stick with the 56cm or down size to a 54cm? If I was to go on top tube alone, the 56cm seems like the logical choice ... the top tube is 565mm, just like my Tarmacs. The 54cm has a noticably shorter top tube, meaning if all else was equal I'd need a 130mm or 140mm stem. That doesn't make much sense to me. That said, a local shop seemed pretty intent on putting me on a 54cm bike. It felt a little short in the top tube, but I've been off the bike(s) for well over a year and it could be all in my mind. Of course the cynic in me also thought that they might be pusing what they have as opposed to what fit best. Who knows ...

As a reference, I'm around 5'11" and a half ... just shy of 6'0" even. I buy pants with an inseam of 32". I can probably take some other measurements if needed, but I'm guessing this will be enough to at least provide some guidance. In the past, I rode more aggressively and speed was more of a priority. Now I'm just looking to get back in the saddle and on the road again, so comfort is more of a focus. My thought is that the more relaxed geometry of the Roubaix is more appropriate since I'm going to be doing longer rides as opposed to races. I assume my logic here is sound, but I'd be curious to see if anyone disagrees.

So, with all that information, what size would you all recommend? Am I right in going for a 56cm or is the 54cm an option worth considering?

In case anyone is wondering, I sold my other bikes due to injury. My right knee was giving me a ton of trouble and I ended up having two different surguries. I honestly thought I was done riding. I sold almost all of my bike stuff and pretty much got lazy. I realized that I genuinely missed riding, so I have spent the last two months busting my butt and trying to get back on the bike. Since January 6, I've doubled the stretght in my right knee and I've lost 31 pounds. I could still stand to lose another 15 pounds or so, but the good news is that I'm in pretty darn good shape now and I'd like to get back on the bike. That means it's time to look for the right bike and take it home. Yay ... bike shopping!

Anyway, thanks in advance for reading my latest ramblings and thanks to anyone that can provide some insight into my sizing dilema.

Thanks!

Brian


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

The changes in geo between the Tarmac and Roubaix are related to the ride/ handling aspects of the two, not reach. Predictably, the Roubaix's trail is lengthened as are the chainstays, stretching wheelbase a bit, but STA and effective top tube remain the same. 

The LBS has the obvious advantage of seeing you on the bikes, but I can think of no reason why it would be necessary for you to go with a 54. Even if you lost some flexibility, the fact that the Roubaix's HT is taller would compensate for that, as would the adjustable stem (angle). And just as an aside, as you drop the bars (as you would on the Tarmac's), reach lengthens, meaning the comparably sized Roubaix would have a slightly shorter reach right out of the box.

I'd get some definitive reasoning from your LBS before proceeding. Also, how _you_ feel on the bike matters, so if the reach_ feels _short, then it probably is.

EDIT: One afterthought. IMO the fact that you were running a 120mm stem on your 56 Tarmac's should tell the LBS fitter something. At that point, it's better to either stay at the 120 length or go shorter, not longer, as would likely be the case if you went with a 54cm frame.


----------



## jrosteck (Oct 28, 2007)

I too am 5-11 but have 33 or 34 inseam. Have Roubaix and Tarmac both in 58 cm. As others have posted, I do not know why you would downsize if going to a Roubaix, especially since TT length is same. If 56 Tarmac was good fit, 56 Roubaix should be good fit.


----------



## BrianT (Oct 12, 2004)

*Thanks!*

Thanks for both of the replies - they're both in-line with my thoughts. I called back and the shop in question doesn't have a 56cm in stock. As much as I hate to think it, it seems like they were pushing what they had. I guess there's a good reason I don't visit that particular shop very often. And as usual, I'm glad I went with my gut and passed on the bike.

It was easy to get excited about a great deal of a 2009 close-out, but it's not a great deal if the size isn't right. So I'll continue looking for a 56cm close-out. If I don't find one in the coming weeks, I guess I'll have to look at the 2010 models ... that doesn't sound so bad. 

Thanks again for the help ... and if anyone knows about a 2009 Roubaix on closeout in a size 56cm, feel free to shoot me an email or PM. 

Brian


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

BrianT said:


> Thanks for both of the replies - they're both in-line with my thoughts. I called back and the shop in question doesn't have a 56cm in stock. As much as I hate to think it, it seems like they were pushing what they had. I guess there's a good reason I don't visit that particular shop very often. And as usual, I'm glad I went with my gut and passed on the bike.
> 
> It was easy to get excited about a great deal of a 2009 close-out, but it's not a great deal if the size isn't right. So I'll continue looking for a 56cm close-out. If I don't find one in the coming weeks, I guess I'll have to look at the 2010 models ... that doesn't sound so bad.
> 
> ...


While I agree that the circumstances are suspect, in defense of the LBS/ fitter, there are some who believe sizing down has advantages, ranging from weight to stiffness to fit. Of the three criteria, I'd say weight is the only one of any merit, and even that is miniscule.

I'm not straying from what I've posted and believe you'd do well to go with a 56, but like the saying goes, there's at least two sides to every story.


----------



## BrianT (Oct 12, 2004)

PJ352 said:


> While I agree that the circumstances are suspect, in defense of the LBS/ fitter, there are some who believe sizing down has advantages, ranging from weight to stiffness to fit. Of the three criteria, I'd say weight is the only one of any merit, and even that is miniscule.
> 
> I'm not straying from what I've posted and believe you'd do well to go with a 56, but like the saying goes, there's at least two sides to every story.




Understood - and thank you for the clarification. I think the bottom line is that sizing is pretty consistent from the Tarmac to the Roubaix ... a 565mm top tube is a 565mm top tube on both bikes. Given a long history of riding 56cm Tarmacs with zero fit issues, I'm inclined to stick with a 56cm Roubaix. I might think otherwise if I had any doubts or bad issues in the past, but in this case if it ain't broke, there's no need to fix it.

Deep down, I think I knew this already. But it's hard to pass up a great deal on a close-out bike. I needed a quick sanity check and got just that here. In the end, a 54cm bike might work and the shop in question might have the greatest of intentions, but it doesn't seem like a logical risk to take. My best bet is to go with the 56cm that I know works for me.

For what it's worth, I stopped by a different Specialized dealer near work this afternoon. I hopped on a 56cm Roubaix and it felt much better ... like I expected. I think that's the answer ... now it's just a matter of finding the bike.

Thanks again.

Brian


----------



## ukbloke (Sep 1, 2007)

BrianT said:


> In case anyone is wondering, I sold my other bikes due to injury. My right knee was giving me a ton of trouble and I ended up having two different surguries.


Sorry to hear about your knee problems, but it must be exciting to get back into cycling again. Did your original knee injury come about from cycling? Are you working with a sports physiotherapist to get it rehabilitated? You might want to take extra care with bike fit, and take it very easy when getting back on the bike. If money were no object, you might want to consult with someone like Andy Pruitt. It's not like any of us have a spare knee to fall back on!


----------



## Scott in MD (Jun 24, 2008)

I'm just under 6-2 and on a 58 ... I shortened the stock 105 stem to a 90mm... I would think at 5-11-1/2; and with your history on a 56 ... you've gotta be a 56.... Me though? ... I've always thought Spesh should add a size 57 ... with a 573 TT. That would be perfect for me.


----------



## BrianT (Oct 12, 2004)

Thanks again everyone. I'm continuing my search for a 2009 close-out 56cm Roubaix. If that doesn't pan out, I'll go for the 2010 model.

UKBloke, my knee problems were not caused by cycling. I might have exacerbated things by pushing myself too hard on the bike after the initial injury, but that's it. There are a few excellent fitters in the area and I am definitely considering a professional fit once I've spent some time in the saddle and regained some more strength and flexibility.

Thanks again.

Brian

PS I know everyone here loves pictures. I promise I'll post some when I finally get a bike!


----------



## rosborn (May 10, 2009)

Brian,

I agree with the others. I rode a 58 cm Tarmac Comp (2005) but sold it early last year. I was uncomfortable on that bike for a variety of reasons. Last June I bought a 58 cm Roubaix (2009) and the difference for me is unbelievable. Though the measurements are nearly identical the longer head tube has relieved all of the comfort issues I had with the Tarmac.

You need to stick with the 56 cm bike.

Rob


----------



## BrianT (Oct 12, 2004)

Rob,

Thanks. I really think the longer head tube seems like it will allow me to be more comfortable, allowing me to ride longer without a huge compromise in terms of speed. As I've gotten older, my focus is on longer, more enjoyable rides as opposed to hammer-fests and races.

I've been dialing like mad, trying to find deals on a 2009 close-out (good thing I have the unlimited call plan) and continuing to search for used options. If nothing else, I'm learning to be more patient.  I know that in time I'll either find one or I'll wait long enough to be able to buy a new one. Either way, I can't wait to hit the road again and work my way back up to a century ride.

Thanks again for the help.

Brian


----------

