Tarmac SL4 Comp vs. Roubaix SL4 Comp

ToffieBoi · Oct 11, 2013

Hello everyone. I am about to buy one of these bikes soon.
I am riding on 2009 Tarmac Expert bike with Ultegra 6700 parts now. I have 23mm wide Token C28A wheels and 24C Continental tires.
I'm 180cm tall and 65kg.

Roads I am riding are mostly hilly. Full of 3rd and 4th category climbs, strava says like that. Many short and stiff climbs too. Also 50% of it have bad quality tarmac with many potholes, damages. Rest is quite good.

These are the components I can afford. I wish I could have both

Specialized Bicycle Components
Specialized Bicycle Components

Bad roads and some pain on my shoulders and arms says that I need roubaix. Also red frame is tempting

But since I have many climbs and I like climbing, I don't want to sacrifice any performance at all. Buying $3000 bike and regretting because of performance will destroy all my motivation.

So if there are anyone out there who could compare those bikes, or have both, can you please tell me if I will regret buying roubaix because of performance issues or not.

s-one · Oct 11, 2013

During my recent journey for a bike I did test ride both. In my opinion they are both great bikes. I ended choosing the Roubaix because I was coming from a hybrid and the larger headtube plus more upright position made more sense for me for longer rides. While testing the Tarmac it was a great bike.. was lighter and a slightly more aggressive geometry. Not much but noticeable for me. You can't really go wrong with either its just what you prefer.

Dunbar · Oct 11, 2013

Don't assume that the Tarmac will force you to ride a more aggressive position. Depending on your height and inseam you may be able to setup both bikes identical fit-wise. Obviously, if you want the bars level or higher than the seat that will be much easier to achieve with the Roubaix's endurance geometry. The SL4 Roubaix is a very stiff bike so it really comes to the ride-smoothing Zertz inserts vs. the snappier handling of the Tarmac.

spdntrxi · Oct 12, 2013

I test rode Amira (tarmac) and the Ruby ( Roubaix) while getting a bike for my wife. The roubaix is so easy to ride.. the tarmac is like my look 695.. stiff and light and you feel all the roughness. Going by what you listed I'd be leaning Roubaix. A good set of lightweight wheels and it will climb just fine and still soak up the road.

ToffieBoi · Oct 12, 2013

s-one said:
During my recent journey for a bike I did test ride both. In my opinion they are both great bikes. I ended choosing the Roubaix because I was coming from a hybrid and the larger headtube plus more upright position made more sense for me for longer rides. While testing the Tarmac it was a great bike.. was lighter and a slightly more aggressive geometry. Not much but noticeable for me. You can't really go wrong with either its just what you prefer.

Thank you for comment. Wish I could try the bikes but I don't have a chance like that here :/

Dunbar said:
Don't assume that the Tarmac will force you to ride a more aggressive position. Depending on your height and inseam you may be able to setup both bikes identical fit-wise. Obviously, if you want the bars level or higher than the seat that will be much easier to achieve with the Roubaix's endurance geometry. The SL4 Roubaix is a very stiff bike so it really comes to the ride-smoothing Zertz inserts vs. the snappier handling of the Tarmac.

Actually what I think is not the geometry or the ride position, but the stiffness.
On my Tarmac, I am riding with -17 degree stem and I am happy with my position. I was riding more than 10 hours like that without any pain, on smooth roads. I have pain when road quality drops.

You say that Roubaix is stiff enough for climbs,but just zertz inserts make it smoother.

spdntrxi said:
I test rode Amira (tarmac) and the Ruby ( Roubaix) while getting a bike for my wife. The roubaix is so easy to ride.. the tarmac is like my look 695.. stiff and light and you feel all the roughness. Going by what you listed I'd be leaning Roubaix. A good set of lightweight wheels and it will climb just fine and still soak up the road.

Weight is not a problem. I am not obsessed on 200gr on the frame. Bike I am riding now is around 8kg and I am happy with it. I don't want anything lighter. I don't need anything lighter.
That was the reason I sold my 1400gr wheelsets and bought 1500gr Token C28A. Wider, more comfortable, more aero and stiffer.

What you also say is, Roubaix is stiff enough if we compare it with Tarmac. Am I right?

Dunbar · Oct 12, 2013

ToffieBoi said:
What you also say is, Roubaix is stiff enough if we compare it with Tarmac. Am I right?

I haven't ridden the Roubaix SL4 8r frame you are considering but the 10r frame I rode for ~500 miles was very stiff. Most of the reviews I've read say it's basically equivalent to the Tarmac SL4 in stiffness.

spdntrxi · Oct 12, 2013

my wife's ruby is a 10r frame... plenty stiff. The Amira and Tarmacs I rode where both S-works so 11r... I changed the wheels on my wife's bike to 22mm on 25c GP4000s tires.... rides like a dream. (old DT Axis 3.0---> Roval SLX23's)

Mark 63 · Oct 12, 2013

I'm working on the same choice, though I'm 20 kilos heavier. My current bike is a Secteur Comp, and I'm leaning toward the Tarmac SL4 Comp to change things up a bit and get a more lively ride. Maybe it's a mid-life crisis issue, but the Roubaix feels a bit like accepting that I'm getting old.

roadworthy · Oct 12, 2013

Mark 63 said:
I'm working on the same choice, though I'm 20 kilos heavier. My current bike is a Secteur Comp, and I'm leaning toward the Tarmac SL4 Comp to change things up a bit and get a more lively ride. Maybe it's a mid-life crisis issue, but the Roubaix feels a bit like accepting that I'm getting old.

That is funny. Choice of either bike has nothing to do with age. I have two CAT 2 buddies who race Roubaixs. I pass guys on Tarmacs all the time on mine. Ask anybody at Specialized what bike is the most popular for lunch time rides....it isn't the Tarmac or the Venge. Age has nothing to do with speed. You can be young and slow.

Mark 63 · Oct 12, 2013

I'm sure you're right. The guy at the shop encourages the Roubaix.
It's not always easy to remain rational on the verge of 50.

Dunbar · Oct 13, 2013

Mark 63 said:
I'm sure you're right. The guy at the shop encourages the Roubaix. It's not always easy to remain rational on the verge of 50.

It's your money, seriously buy what you really want. I'm 36 years old and have no anxieties about being seen on a Roubaix. We all know it's not the bike, it's the motor. I see plenty of old men on S-Works and Cervelos but I guess that's because they're the only ones who can afford them

BTW, I'm back on my 2013 SL2 Roubaix (post warranty repair) and it just reaffirms how stiff the SL4 Expert loaner bike I had was. My SL2 Roubaix is quite a bit more compliant over rough roads compared to the SL4 albeit not quite as stiff.

roadworthy · Oct 13, 2013

Dunbar said:
It's your money, seriously buy what you really want. I'm 36 years old and have no anxieties about being seen on a Roubaix. We all know it's not the bike, it's the motor. I see plenty of old men on S-Works and Cervelos but I guess that's because they're the only ones who can afford them

BTW, I'm back on my 2013 SL2 Roubaix (post warranty repair) and it just reaffirms how stiff the SL4 Expert loaner bike I had was. My SL2 Roubaix is quite a bit more compliant over rough roads compared to the SL4 albeit not quite as stiff.

I enjoy your posts Dunbar. Really begs the question in terms of the direction that Specialized has taken the Roubaix. My SL3 Pro Roubaix is stiff. Certainly not as stiff as a Tarmac but still quite stiff over poor roads in particular. Of course Specialized has taken the Roubaix this direction to give it more a race bike feel which perhaps manifests some speed on acceleration and climbing albeit small. But you mention that your SL2 Sworks Roubaix is more compliant than the 10r carbon Expert SL4. Word is Specialized has made the SL4 Roubaix even stiffer than my SL3 Roubaix because it has more of a Tarmac rear triangle on it...even more responsive...but at what cost? Many that opt for a Roubaix want a bike that will take the rough stuff better. So there is clearly a sweet spot. This is one of the reasons I am in no hurry to upgrade to a SL4 Roubaix. Yes, the SL4 Roubaix is likely the most responsive Roubaix ever but no doubt this has a cost in ride over less than pristine road surfaces. Some of this of course can be tuned with judicious choice of wheels and rubber. New wider wheels change the tire footprint and allow lower tire pressures without fear of pinch flats and a good hedge against stiff frames on poor roads.

roadworthy · Oct 13, 2013

Mark 63 said:
I'm sure you're right. The guy at the shop encourages the Roubaix.
It's not always easy to remain rational on the verge of 50.

The Roubaix far and away is the better choice among the average rider. So you have to ask yourself what kind of rider are you?...or what kind of rider do you aspire to? If you like to ride around at 22-25 mph all the time in the drops hammering, you may be a candidate for a Tarmac.

But there is a bit more to it. A nuance is, it depends on your flexibility and also your body proportion. There is a parallel universe in fit. Take two 6' tall riders...one with short legs and one with long legs like me. I have such a friend...ex bike racer, great guy. We are the same height. His bike looks completely different. He rides one size smaller with conventional head tube length and has a much lower seat than my Roubaix. A short legged rider will fit the same on a Tarmac as a long legged rider will fit on a Roubaix. If you compare geometry charts, top tubes and sta's size to size are the same. So pick the bike that fits you the best. If I had short legs for my height, I may be on a Tarmac.

As to keeping one's objectivity....I believe it is harder than ever now at any age. If the world doesn't make you crazy than you likely aren't paying attention because the world has basically gone mad. Or...its always been that way but the internet has exposed people for who they really are and it ain't a pretty picture.

I cope by riding a lot and listening to my extensive music collection. Btw, I am 59. Also, stay away from motorcycles. I love motorcycles and they are addictive.

Good riding.

Mark 63 · Oct 13, 2013

roadworthy said:
A nuance is, it depends on your flexibility and also your body proportion. There is a parallel universe in fit. Take two 6' tall riders...one with short legs and one with long legs like me. I have such a friend...ex bike racer, great guy. We are the same height. His bike looks completely different. He rides one size smaller with conventional head tube length and has a much lower seat than my Roubaix. A short legged rider will fit the same on a Tarmac as a long legged rider will fit on a Roubaix. If you compare geometry charts, top tubes and sta's size to size are the same. So pick the bike that fits you the best. If I had short legs for my height, I may be on a Tarmac.
Also, stay away from motorcycles. I love motorcycles and they are addictive.
Good riding.

Interesting points, thank you. I fit into the former category--5'11 with legs shorter than average.

I promised my wife--no motorcycles. Bicycle and saxophone for me.

roadworthy · Oct 13, 2013

Mark 63 said:
Interesting points, thank you. I fit into the former category--5'11 with legs shorter than average.

I promised my wife--no motorcycles. Bicycle and saxophone for me.

If your inseam is shorter than average for your height, then you may want to consider a Tarmac. This will allow you a longer top tube relative to head tube length to serve your torso length. Top tube is analogous to torso length and head tube is an analog of leg length.
The bikes handle differently. Some find the Tarmac twitchier than a Roubaix. One man's twitchy however is another's perfect. I prefer the more steady handling and tracking of the Roubaix but others will want more a race bike feel of a Tarmac.
Best to ride both bikes to determine what you like. 56 in either bike will likely be your best size with a slightly longer stem than stock.
Have fun.

Typetwelve · Oct 13, 2013

This exact topic came up here a few weeks ago...so I thought I'd repost my thoughts:

I spent last year on a 2009 SL2 Roubaix...and this year on a 2012 SL2 Tarmac.

When it comes to pure "bump for bump" ride quality, the Roubaix wins hands down...then again the Tarmac feels more connected and lively.

I feel the larger issue between the two bikes is the geometry of the frame. Do this, go to Specialized and open up a window of the Tarmac, then in another tab, the Roubaix. Click back and forth between the two and look at the difference. The differences are small but in the world of cycling, small differences go a long way. The wheel base is longer on the Roubaix, the head tube is longer on the Roubaix and the seating position more upright. These subtle differences make a big difference in how they ride.

Now...some will say you can change the "fit" to make the seating position more aggressive on a Roubaix but a fact is, you cannot change the frame and that's where the differences are.

Now...with that aside...my opinions.

I went with a Tarmac because I wanted a more aggressive ride. I have more time to pound out fast 20-25 miles rides than I do a century. I'm not saying the Roubaix isn't fast or the Tarmac cannot be taken to distance...I'm saying they aren't in their element in those roles. Truth be told, winter of 2014-15 I'm saving $$ to get a Roubaix as I really want both. I'm not regretting the decision to get a Tarmac as I adore riding the thing, if I could only own one, I feel I made the right choice. On the other hand, the Roubaix is a great bike and super smooth, I loved riding the thing and my ass/body really does miss it on the longer rides, that's for sure. That's why I'm going to get one. Either way, they are different bikes and you're going to have to decide what you want I guess...just don't let anyone tell you there is little difference between the two...

Typetwelve · Oct 13, 2013

roadworthy said:
I enjoy your posts Dunbar. Really begs the question in terms of the direction that Specialized has taken the Roubaix. My SL3 Pro Roubaix is stiff. Certainly not as stiff as a Tarmac but still quite stiff over poor roads in particular. Of course Specialized has taken the Roubaix this direction to give it more a race bike feel which perhaps manifests some speed on acceleration and climbing albeit small. But you mention that your SL2 Sworks Roubaix is more compliant than the 10r carbon Expert SL4. Word is Specialized has made the SL4 Roubaix even stiffer than my SL3 Roubaix because it has more of a Tarmac rear triangle on it...even more responsive...but at what cost? Many that opt for a Roubaix want a bike that will take the rough stuff better. So there is clearly a sweet spot. This is one of the reasons I am in no hurry to upgrade to a SL4 Roubaix. Yes, the SL4 Roubaix is likely the most responsive Roubaix ever but no doubt this has a cost in ride over less than pristine road surfaces. Some of this of course can be tuned with judicious choice of wheels and rubber. New wider wheels change the tire footprint and allow lower tire pressures without fear of pinch flats and a good hedge against stiff frames on poor roads.

This concerns me...

Like I said earlier, I spent last season on. 2009 7r SL2 Roubaix and loved it. Like I also said, when the time came to buy my own I went with the Tarmac but knew what I was getting into with the plan of adding a Roubaix later.

I keep hearing that they are making the Roubaix stiffer and stiffer which really sucks. Why do this? The thing that made the SL2 so smooth was the flex...it made for a very plush ride. If they continue to make it more and more unforgiving...it will just become the Tarmac with vibration dampers.

Either way...ill be in the market for a long distance road bike come this time next year...which will put me smack dab in the SL4 arena. If I find that plush ride is gone...I guess I'll have to look elsewhere...

Typetwelve · Oct 13, 2013

Dunbar said:
Don't assume that the Tarmac will force you to ride a more aggressive position. Depending on your height and inseam you may be able to setup both bikes identical fit-wise. Obviously, if you want the bars level or higher than the seat that will be much easier to achieve with the Roubaix's endurance geometry. The SL4 Roubaix is a very stiff bike so it really comes to the ride-smoothing Zertz inserts vs. the snappier handling of the Tarmac.

I'm not trying to be argumentative...but this keeps coming up and I disagree.

Time and time again I keep seeing comments like yours and its simply not true...if the bike is fit correctly. Think of it this way:

You buy a bike based on fit. Once you have the correct size frame you must adjust the components on it correctly. Bar height, seat position, stem position...all are based on body geometry, not how you "want" to sit. Once your seat is adjusted properly for your legs, it is what it is. Then you must adjust the bars correctly. The frame of the Tarmac and the Roubaix cannot be altered...and they are different. Artificially moving the bars or seat up/down on a Tarmac or Roubaix to mimic the geometry of the other will throw your body out of whack. The Tarmac has a more aggressive seating position...raising the handlebars to match the larger head tube of a Roubaix will throw everything else out of whack...

Sorry...I'm being long winded...

Long story short...a Tarmac is a Tarmac and a Roubaix is a Roubaix. Buying one and then fighting the frame geometry to make it closer to the other is silly...

Dunbar · Oct 13, 2013

Typetwelve said:
I'm not trying to be argumentative...but this keeps coming up and I disagree.

No problem, I think Roadworthy also gave the example that inseam really matters when it comes to fit. With the taller head tube of the Roubaix you can always do what the pros do and size down a frame size (or two in the case of pros) and run a longer stem and/or setback seat post. Here's a photo of a guy jmX on bikeforums.net that did exactly that. Obviously you can't change the handling of the Roubaix vs. the Tarmac so that's something to consider.

BTW, Roadworthy I wish I could afford an S-Works but I ride a standard Roubaix Elite SL2.

jmX's bike:

roadworthy · Oct 13, 2013

Typetwelve said:
This concerns me...

Like I said earlier, I spent last season on. 2009 7r SL2 Roubaix and loved it. Like I also said, when the time came to buy my own I went with the Tarmac but knew what I was getting into with the plan of adding a Roubaix later.

I keep hearing that they are making the Roubaix stiffer and stiffer which really sucks. Why do this? The thing that made the SL2 so smooth was the flex...it made for a very plush ride. If they continue to make it more and more unforgiving...it will just become the Tarmac with vibration dampers.

Either way...ill be in the market for a long distance road bike come this time next year...which will put me smack dab in the SL4 arena. If I find that plush ride is gone...I guess I'll have to look elsewhere...

They do it because an endurance bike doesn't have to be soft to not create a large dividend 50 miles into a demanding ride with 50 more miles to ride. The efficiency of a stiff frame is undeniable and why stiff frames are popular in racing circles. But there is much more. A basic tenant of design is when higher modulus carbon is used to create a stiffer frame, less of it is required which reduces weight. On a century where a Roubaix shines, a light bike is appreciated...especially if there is a lot of climbing.
As to geometry and riding position....the laid out angles of the Roubaix is what gives it a more supple ride. The laid out softer rear triangle and increase fork rake and trail is what softens the impact of undulating road surfaces. A more vertical bike like the Tarmac which gives the bike it short wheel base and quick handling will have a stiffer ride. Physics. So designers want to give the Roubaix the same good carbon as the Tarmac and lay out its angles to make it more compliant which it is.
As to your earlier point about riding position, you are correct...but only in degree. Latitude can be applied to any race bike to make it more upright. Before the advent of endurance bikes like the Roubaix I rode slammed race bikes with shorter head tube and saddle to bar drop was what it was with my long legs. So part of the calculus I believe when choosing the right bike is what you state...the bike should fit the proportion of the rider within a given tolerance. Dunbar made a good point about sizing. Sizing down is typically more racey...how you ride for example. You could easily ride one size up Tarmac and you would naturally have 20 more mm's of bar height and adjust stem length accordingly. It is up to the rider to decide where the sweet spot is. If you put a riser stem on a Tarmac for example to replicate the riding position of a Roubaix, it will foul the handling of the bike fractionally. This is because more weight is transferred to the rear of a shorter wheelbase bike and the reason that a Roubaix has longer chainstays and wheelbase, because a taller head tube does the same thing and the longer rear triangle and wheelbase lessens rear weight transfer to maintain respectable handling when riding more upright..

Cheers.

Tarmac SL4 Comp vs. Roubaix SL4 Comp

ToffieBoi

s-one

Dunbar

spdntrxi

ToffieBoi

Dunbar

spdntrxi

Mark 63

roadworthy

Mark 63

Dunbar

roadworthy

roadworthy

Mark 63

roadworthy

Typetwelve

Typetwelve

Typetwelve

Dunbar

roadworthy

Top Contributors this Month

Recommended Communities