# Roubaix 'race' worthy?



## hrv (Dec 9, 2001)

Starting to look at bikes. Going to give the Roubaix a try next weekend. From reading the posts here it might be a good bike for long road races, but not great for crits. Other than crashing it, why is that? Long wheelbase? Also, I ride a 56, the headtube on that size is 190. That's huge! So I won't be able to get the same saddle to bar drop as I do on my 160 ht bike, correct?

I currently ride a 1999 Spec. Allez (Stumjumper FSR and Langster too!). Full alu, even fork. Never feel like I'm getting beat up. Funny to read about 'teeth-chattering/bone-shaking' bikes! But I'm ready to try the new stuff and just see if anything 'sings' to me. 

I race a fair amount, mid-pack cat 4. Will give the Roubaix a try unless someone talks me out of it, like it's built more for comfort than speed, etc.

Thanks,
hrv


----------



## shokhead1 (Jan 21, 2003)

I think you should look at the Tarmac Pro.


----------



## bsavery123 (Nov 8, 2004)

I dont think it would be bad per se, but maybe not as quick handling as a tarmac


----------



## hairscrambled (Nov 18, 2004)

*Not a snap*

The Roubaix is not a fast accelerating bike. It doesn't get out of slow corners as well as other bikes might. On group rides I seem to have to work a little harder to get the bike back up to speed. Great bike but not a racer.


----------



## acid_rider (Nov 23, 2004)

hairscrambled said:


> The Roubaix is not a fast accelerating bike. It doesn't get out of slow corners as well as other bikes might. On group rides I seem to have to work a little harder to get the bike back up to speed. Great bike but not a racer.


what model of Roubaix is it and what year? Is it a full carbon (Comp/Pro)? or mainly alloy (Elite)? Do you have any other comments on this bike such as its quality, comfort, weight, etc? I am thinking of buying a 2005 Roubaix carbon frame bike (Comp? Elite 2005? etc).

My alternative is 2005 Tarmac Comp..... Or a 2005 Bianchi 928 carbon....

thanks


----------



## hairscrambled (Nov 18, 2004)

acid_rider said:


> what model of Roubaix is it and what year? Is it a full carbon (Comp/Pro)? or mainly alloy (Elite)? Do you have any other comments on this bike such as its quality, comfort, weight, etc? I am thinking of buying a 2005 Roubaix carbon frame bike (Comp? Elite 2005? etc).
> 
> My alternative is 2005 Tarmac Comp..... Or a 2005 Bianchi 928 carbon....
> 
> thanks


I have an '04 Roubaix Comp 27 (triple). It is a carbon frame and I replaced the wheels with Mavic Ksyriums SSC SLs. The bike is very comfortable as far as ride and geometry. It is also the lightest bike I've had. The 4 position stem is really only two as I can't imagine running the lowest or highest positions. I like the tall headtube and low toptube. The Zertz inserts reduce higher frequency vibrations as the bike is very quiet. I like the black glossy finish and the silver logos. I always seem to look forward to riding this bike. Especially longer rides.


----------



## jumpstumper (Aug 17, 2004)

Why do you say it isn't fast accelerating? Could the difference be the engine?  
I have no problem with acceleration on the Roubaix! 



hairscrambled said:


> The Roubaix is not a fast accelerating bike. It doesn't get out of slow corners as well as other bikes might. On group rides I seem to have to work a little harder to get the bike back up to speed. Great bike but not a racer.


----------



## hairscrambled (Nov 18, 2004)

jumpstumper said:


> Why do you say it isn't fast accelerating? Could the difference be the engine?
> I have no problem with acceleration on the Roubaix!


The engine could be better.

The Roubaix could be raced and may even be a good choice for a long race like the El Tour de Tucson (109 miles). For short races I wouldn't choose a Roubaix but then I need every advantage.


----------



## jumpstumper (Aug 17, 2004)

If by short races you mean crits, then I tend to agree with you. I can't throw the Roubaix around like I could my Tomassini which was set up for crits. The Roubaix is great on the road!



hairscrambled said:


> The engine could be better.
> 
> The Roubaix could be raced and may even be a good choice for a long race like the El Tour de Tucson (109 miles). For short races I wouldn't choose a Roubaix but then I need every advantage.


----------



## DSMaryland (Jan 2, 2005)

hrv said:


> Starting to look at bikes. Going to give the Roubaix a try next weekend. From reading the posts here it might be a good bike for long road races, but not great for crits. Other than crashing it, why is that? Long wheelbase? Also, I ride a 56, the headtube on that size is 190. That's huge! So I won't be able to get the same saddle to bar drop as I do on my 160 ht bike, correct?
> 
> I currently ride a 1999 Spec. Allez (Stumjumper FSR and Langster too!). Full alu, even fork. Never feel like I'm getting beat up. Funny to read about 'teeth-chattering/bone-shaking' bikes! But I'm ready to try the new stuff and just see if anything 'sings' to me.
> 
> ...


Just get out there and race! I have a 2004 Roubaix Comp and probably wouldn't race it in a crit because I'd worry about crashing it. But in a road race, sure! In my opinion, any bike that is reasonably light, stiff, and, most importantly of all, fits you comfortably, is race-worthy. As a rule of thumb, if you're properly motivated for the race, then you won't care if you break your equipment. Ultimately, your performance results are going to be much more a function of your fitness and motivation than a fractional difference in equipment. I did local 2nd and 3rd division road races in France in the mid-80's (while doing a year abroad as a college student) with a very stock Peugeot I got at the local bike shop and did just fine because I was super-motivated and was having a lot of fun. In fact, a lot of these races were won by guys running less than the latest equipment.


----------

