# Tarmac too stiff?



## stumpy_steve (Nov 5, 2006)

I love the new Tarmac Comp in the Gerolstiener color, and was looking at the Roubaix Comp in carbon red because same price range. I like the colors of the tarmac better, plus it comes with a better saddle, and the gruppo looks the same, other than no z in the fork. Been told that the tarmac is going to be stiffer/more relentless on comfort, but quicker and funner. Not intended for centurys (roubaixs job). Can you guys help me out here, im a 6'1 18 year old guy who wants to get into road biking, but i only have a mtn right now (hence the name stumpy... stumpjumper). Any suggestions, even though this is a sbc forum, on other brands? PLus, whats your take on both. Thanks alot!


----------



## CFBlue (Jun 28, 1999)

I went Saturday and rode both the Tarmac and the Roubaix actually it was the Sworks Roubaix. I would tell you to do the same b/c the feel is going to be different due in part that you only have it to compare to the mtn bike. I have 2 other road bike Treks and they were high end aluminum frames w/ carbon front/back fork, son has carbon Raliegh and can tell you the bikes yesterday were by far nicer bikes than those. The 07 Tarmac Expeert was catlike quick didn't take much to get it screaming, but the ride was a little rough. the roads were extremely bad w/ small potholes just overall rough roads and so the ride was rough. Then proceded to ride the 06 S works Roubaix at the owner urging, and I gotta tell you that was one hell of a sweet ride, it seemed to glide over the rough roads, although weight seemed lighter than the Tarmac(don't know actual on either) it wasn't explosive as the Tarmac. They are both great bikes, I went in w/intension of purchasing the 07 Tarmac Pro but after ridding the sw Roubaix and the fact the owner offered a sweet deal on it now at this point can't make my mind up. 
You are young still and don't mind the rougher ride, plus more than likely your like my son (bout the same age) all he's interested in is going fast.
My suggestion to you is to go ride whatever bike your intererested in before sinking the money and then not be happy w/ what you have, best of luck


----------



## DaveK (Jan 8, 2006)

*Tarmac and father time*

Tomorrow I turn 42. I didnt want my first carbon fiber bike to be a cruiser, so I jumped at the 06 Tarmac Expert in Carbon. This bike was Bike of the year by Bicycle Magazine. 

It is what it is, a fast twitchy fun stiff road bike that you can do anything on if you are in shape and committed to cycling. I rode my first century on it in September.

I must confess, my next bike will most likely be the Roubaix, but for now, I am still athletic enough to ride this one, so I do and I am loving it. 18 years old, you will most likley get into Crit type racing I would assume, 30-50 mile spirited group rides. You can't go wrong with the Tarmac.

-Enjoy


----------



## critchie (Apr 27, 2004)

stumpy_steve said:


> I love the new Tarmac Comp in the Gerolstiener color, and was looking at the Roubaix Comp in carbon red because same price range. I like the colors of the tarmac better, plus it comes with a better saddle, and the gruppo looks the same, other than no z in the fork. Been told that the tarmac is going to be stiffer/more relentless on comfort, but quicker and funner. Not intended for centurys (roubaixs job). Can you guys help me out here, im a 6'1 18 year old guy who wants to get into road biking, but i only have a mtn right now (hence the name stumpy... stumpjumper). Any suggestions, even though this is a sbc forum, on other brands? PLus, whats your take on both. Thanks alot!


First, the Tarmac comes in three colors.

The ride will definitely be better on the Roubaix; it's supposed to be. However, the Tarmac will be a very nice riding bike. Compare it to other companies' bikes and you will think it's plush. The Roubaix are just the nicest riding things available.


----------



## uzziefly (Jul 15, 2006)

critchie said:


> First, the Tarmac comes in three colors.
> 
> The ride will definitely be better on the Roubaix; it's supposed to be. However, the Tarmac will be a very nice riding bike. Compare it to other companies' bikes and you will think it's plush. The Roubaix are just the nicest riding things available.



I think my Madone SSL is a great ride too 

That said, I am looking at a second frame and am really considering an S Works Tarmac/Roubaix. Wanna try em out first before I decide. 

To the OP, FWIW, I'm 21 years old and well, I think the Tarmac would do you well as you probably could deal with it's stiffness etc s. the more comfy Roubaix. That said, try out both bikes for feel (not parking lot 5 minute rides!) and decide. 

Good luck


----------



## connie (Jul 30, 2006)

"Twitchy" is a very good descriptor of the Tarmac. "Skittish" would be another. I guess the more experienced would call it "responsive." The Tarmac just did not feel comfortable to me, and the Roubaix did, but I admit to being a bit older, slower, and probably a bit heavier than you are.


----------



## uzziefly (Jul 15, 2006)

Hmmm... Responsive eh? That's nice.. I needa try em out once the stock arrives at my dealer..

I might go w the Roubaix though, just so well, it's comfy.. Or not.. You have both? S Works?


----------



## connie (Jul 30, 2006)

I have an '06 Roubaix expert. After much test riding, this was the bike (under 4k--I did ride one "dream machine" that was way out of my league) that felt the best. I did spend a fair amount of time on a Tarmac wallowing in indescision. The Roubaix ride is very smooth, as it is designed to be, and the difference between those two is obvious. The Roubaix probably has a very different ride from your Madone.


----------



## CaseLawZ28 (Jul 14, 2005)

I have a Tarmac Expert and no comfort issues here. I actually find it very comfortable and I've done some centuries on it (planned and unplanned).


----------



## uzziefly (Jul 15, 2006)

connie said:


> The Roubaix ride is very smooth, as it is designed to be, and the difference between those two is obvious. The Roubaix probably has a very different ride from your Madone.


Thanks for the input.
Different from my Madone as in more comfy right? While I don't mind the bumps and all, I'd like to actually try a 'comfy' race bike just to see how it feels and well, perhaps not feel the bumps as much sometimes.

How's the stiffness of the Roubaix? I'm wondering why the MSRP of the S Works Roubaix is actually higher then the S Works Tarmac, considering the Roubaix to be more 'comfort' oriented.. 

Comparing the 2, which would be a 'faster' bike? Is stiffness in the Roubaix compromised to make it more comfortable? And, which is lighter? 



CaseLawZ28 said:


> I have a Tarmac Expert and no comfort issues here. I actually find it very comfortable and I've done some centuries on it (planned and unplanned).


Hmm, it would seem the Tarmac, especially the S Works Tarmac, would be comfortable after all despite it's agressiveness. 

That said, I only wish Specialized had something like a Project One like Trek does to custom the paintjob. Of course I could always repaint the frame but that'll be both troublesome and fun I guess.

Thanks


----------



## critchie (Apr 27, 2004)

uzziefly said:


> Thanks for the input.
> Different from my Madone as in more comfy right? While I don't mind the bumps and all, I'd like to actually try a 'comfy' race bike just to see how it feels and well, perhaps not feel the bumps as much sometimes.
> 
> How's the stiffness of the Roubaix? I'm wondering why the MSRP of the S Works Roubaix is actually higher then the S Works Tarmac, considering the Roubaix to be more 'comfort' oriented..
> ...


BB Stiffness (Stiffest to least stiff)

*Cervelo R3 - 1038.7*
*Specialized S-Works Tarmac SL - 720.3*
*Scott CR1 - 716.3*
*Cannondale Synapse - 635.4*
*Specialized S-Works Roubaix SL - 632.2*
*Cervelo Soloist*
*Specialized S-Works Tarmac*
*Look 585*
*Giant TCR Advanced - 604.9*
*Specialized S-Works Tarmac E5*
*Specialized Roubaix Pro*
*Trek Madone SL 5.9 - 544.7*
*Kestral Evoke*
*Calfee Dragonfly*
*Cannondale 6-13 - 532.7*
*Orbea Opal*
*Specialized Tarmac Pro*
*Trek Madone 5900 - 511.0*
*Giant TCR*
*Seven Elium - 488.8*
*Lemond Victoire*
*Look Kg 486*
*Look 555*
*Serotta Ottrott - 435.0*
*06 Orbea Orca - 418.1*​
​Torsional Stiffness (Most to Least)​*Cervelo R3 - 88.0*
*Specialized S-Works Tarmac SL - 67.8*
*Scott CR1 - 67.1*
*Specialized S-Works Roubaix SL - 54.9*
*Cannondale Synapse - 54.9*
*Specialized S-Works Tarmac - 52.4*
*Trek Madone SL 5.9 - 50.5*
*06 Specialized Roubaix Pro - 48.4*
*Cervelo Soloist - 46.9*
*Kestral Evoke*
*Look 585*
*Specialized Tarmac Pro*
*Trek Madone 5900 - 44.8*
*Giant TCR Advanced - 42.7*
*Calfee Dragonfly*
*Orbea Opal*
*Specialized S-Works Tarmac E5*
*Time VX*
*Giant TCR*
*Cannondale 6-13 - 37.0*
*06 Orbea Orca - 35.7*
*Look 555*
*Serotta Ottrott*
*Lemond Victoire*
*Look Kg 486*
*Seven Elium - 30.7*
*Litespeed Vortex - 29.2*​
​Vertical Compliance (comfort)​*Specialized S-Works Roubaix SL - 12.6*
*Specialized S-Works Tarmac SL - 11.3*
*06 Giant TCR Advanced - 10.3*
*06 Trek Madone 5.9 SL - 9.3*
*05 Trek Madone 110 OCLV - 9.1*
*06 Cervelo R3 - 8.7*
*06 Calfee Dragonfly Pro - 8.4*
*05 Cervelo Soloist - 8.2*
*06 Cannondale Synapse - 8.1*
*06 Scott CR1 LTD - 7.8*

*Note: The difference of 1.3 between the Roubaix SL & Tarmac SL is like a 30lb difference in tire pressure, so you can see compliance differences are hugh - the Scott rides like a board.*​
​Sorry I did not include all #s (just too many), but this should give some indication of the different brands.​
​


----------



## uzziefly (Jul 15, 2006)

Any idea as to the numbers of the Madone SSL 5.9 and the new SSL 6.9? Thanks


----------



## critchie (Apr 27, 2004)

uzziefly said:


> Any idea as to the numbers of the Madone SSL 5.9 and the new SSL 6.9? Thanks


No, but i suspect not much as these are not new construction methods, rather more tweaking of a current design. Also, the tube & lug construction is a bit limited in its ability to provide truly stiff bikes.


----------



## Mark McM (Jun 18, 2005)

*Tire pressure difference?*



critchie said:


> [/SIZE][/FONT]
> [/INDENT][FONT=Gotham-Book+T42+CMIGQI]Vertical Compliance (comfort)​*Specialized S-Works Roubaix SL - 12.6*
> *Specialized S-Works Tarmac SL - 11.3*
> *06 Giant TCR Advanced - 10.3*
> ...




Did this last piece of information ("The difference of 1.3 between the Roubaix SL & Tarmac SL is like a 30lb difference in tire pressure") come from the test data? It doesn't really make sense - if a difference of 1.3 is equavalent to 30 psi of tire pressure, then the difference between the 12.6 (Specialized S-Works Roubaix SL) and 7.8 (Scott CR1 LTD) would be like 110 psi of tire pressure. Are you saying that the Scott CR1 LTD rides like the tires are riding on the rims?

Or did you just fabricate this piece of "data"?​


----------



## critchie (Apr 27, 2004)

Mark McM said:


> Did this last piece of information ("The difference of 1.3 between the Roubaix SL & Tarmac SL is like a 30lb difference in tire pressure") come from the test data? It doesn't really make sense - if a difference of 1.3 is equavalent to 30 psi of tire pressure, then the difference between the 12.6 (Specialized S-Works Roubaix SL) and 7.8 (Scott CR1 LTD) would be like 110 psi of tire pressure. Are you saying that the Scott CR1 LTD rides like the tires are riding on the rims?
> 
> Or did you just fabricate this piece of "data"?


NO, I did NOT fabricate anything. It is a way to represent the difference in these numbers and comes from the same source as the test data.

I think it is a pretty easy way to represent the numbers when just a number would mean nothing - like if you didn't know what a pound was.

The tire pressure of the Scott would NOT be like 110 psi, in fact the tire pressure in the Tarmac SL would be like 90 psi. Yes, the Scott would be like riding on the rims in comparison, and I have ridden both and there is no comparison in ride quality between the two. The 07 SW Roubaix is vastly better; however, the Scott is a little bit stiffer in both BB & torsional stiffness. It is up to the individual which they want, but if they want both, take the Tarmac SL.​


----------



## Mark McM (Jun 18, 2005)

*Test data source?*



critchie said:


> NO, I did NOT fabricate anything. It is a way to represent the difference in these numbers and comes from the same source as the test data.​




So, what is the source of this data?



critchie said:


> I think it is a pretty easy way to represent the numbers when just a number would mean nothing - like if you didn't know what a pound was.


These equavalent tire pressure differences don't mean anything either, if you don't know the test conditions. A 30 lb. difference in my 32mm CX tires (60 psi max) is a much bigger difference than in my 20 mm TT tires (150 psi max).

Just for completely, can you tell us which of of these bicycle brands you sell?



critchie said:


> The tire pressure of the Scott would NOT be like 110 psi, in fact the tire pressure in the Tarmac SL would be like 90 psi. Yes, the Scott would be like riding on the rims in comparison, and I have ridden both and there is no comparison in ride quality between the two.


So, riding the Scott with correctly inflated tires would be like riding the Roubaix SL on the rims? You're kidding, right?​


----------



## critchie (Apr 27, 2004)

Mark McM said:


> So, what is the source of this data?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


*Again, get real. You also have the analogy backward. When we sold Scott, we told people that they are light, stiff & fast, but they ride rather poorly in comparison to many other carbon bikes. We have not waivered on that position and this data supports our seat-of-the-pants impressions of the CR1 stuff.*​


----------



## SuperB (Jul 1, 2004)

I'm with Dave K., I'm in my late 30s and bought an 06 Tarmac Comp several months ago. It is quick but also forgiving. I did not try the Roubaix, but I'm not sure if it would have changed my mind. I generally ride to go fast and the Tarmac does that.


----------



## earthtodan (Nov 11, 2006)

critchie said:


> Again, get real. You also have the analogy backward. When we sold Scott, we told people that they are light, stiff & fast, but they ride rather poorly in comparison to many other carbon bikes. We have not waivered on that position and this data supports our seat-of-the-pants impressions of the CR1 stuff.​


I gotta support critchie here. These test data come from the Specialized stress and stiffness testing lab (which I visited a few days ago), a very impressive facility and one that most bike companies don't have. Of course, you're skeptical of the company's own numbers. Well, apparently a magazine in Germany (I think it's called Tour or something) did a series of similar tests and came out with the same results as Specialized. 

To the original poster: I'd encourage you to get the Tarmac. As much as Specialized emphasizes that the Roubaix is not an old-person's bike, that's actually what it is. If you get into cycling as a speed sport, and you enjoy descending, the Tarmac will deliver on those tight fast corners and the Roubaix will simply not be as good. The Tarmac will not be uncomfortable, especially when you consider that the majority of nice road frames on the market are still aluminum. Twitchiness will not be a problem unless you are epileptic. I could easily take my hands off the bars when I rode one, with zero uncertainty. You're young and you need an aggressive road bike. This is the answer, IMO.


----------



## bsaunder (Oct 27, 2004)

I spent several hours yesterday checking out the Roubaix and Tarmac and comparing them to my current bike (Trek 1200). The most noticeable thing was that both were a much better ride than my 1200, including going over broken pavement, cobblestones, and semi-fresh chip seal. I've ridden a century on my 1200 and don't think a century on a Tarmac would be that bad (better than on my 1200). 
To me the Roubiax felt more like a hybrid bike than a performance road bike. It was sluggish compared to the Tarmac and my 1200. It was very comfortable and if I didn't care about pushing my limits, it would probably work well for me. The Tarmac felt like it was part of me, it responded very quickly, turned/climbed/sprinted well, and actually felt the best under me when riding hands free. One thing that did take me a bit by surprise is I ride a 56cm 1200 and the 56 roubaix fit me, yet it was the 54cm Tarmac that fit me the best, the 56cm tarmac stretched me out a bit too much.


----------



## earthtodan (Nov 11, 2006)

bsaunder said:


> One thing that did take me a bit by surprise is I ride a 56cm 1200 and the 56 roubaix fit me, yet it was the 54cm Tarmac that fit me the best, the 56cm tarmac stretched me out a bit too much.


That is weird, because they both have the same top tube. The difference could have been how high the bar was set up, or the seat on the 56 Tarmac could have been pushed too far back. 
Although come to think of it, Treks are measured center to top, IIRC, meaning that unless you took your current frame size from a tape measure, you're riding an actual 54.5. I suppose it's possible that since the Roubaix has slacker angles, the cockpit could be shorter on the 56 Roubaix than on the 56 Tarmac, but the difference wouldn't be drastic.


----------



## CFBlue (Jun 28, 1999)

it could also be the stem length. I also ad the same experence w/ the 2 bikes, same circumstances. My Trek is 56, rode the 56 Tarmac first and felt stretched, then the 56 SW Roubaix fit was much more accomadating. Back at the shop we compared the 2 and the Tarmac had 120 stem in conjunction w/ seat being back on the rails. Roubaix had 100 stem and more towards the front of seat rails, my Trek has 90 stem and I use Thomson seatpost w/zero offset. It doesn't take a great deal to change the feel of a bike especially if you have put considerable miles in on one setup, the combination of things will inproper fit. With a new bike especially different models it will take time and several adjustments before u get the desired fit. unless you're one of those who can go in off the street adjust the seat and everything feels perfect.


----------



## LeadvilleBlues (May 24, 2003)

Had my first long day on my Tarmac SL a few weeks ago, 5 hrs. in the saddle. No soreness what so ever during the ride, or days after. This was good news for my 54 yr. old body ! My very first carbon ride was the Roubix Pro, so I think I can judge fairly between the two, having done 100 mile days on both. The folks at Specialized have a winner with the numbers of the tape, and the Tarmac ! A fine Fast and Comfort ride blended together, I was surprised.


----------



## dtelson (Jul 10, 2006)

Anyone ride the 07 Tarmac Pro yet? It is the 06/07 SL geometry and I have one being built. Can't wait. I contacted Spesh for the new stifness #s since the Pro is differenct from the bladed one of last year or now this years expert but I suspect the stifness will be close the the SL but the frame will be a tiny bit heavier. Give me a week an I'll give a review. I have an 05 Roubaix pro also and will give some camparisons.


----------

