FlashBazbo

For those who ride/own "endurance" bikes and "race" bikes (think Roubaix vs. Tarmac), as a baseline, what's the difference in your fit for the two types of bikes? Assuming the same bar bend, the "race" bike will have a lower bar height relative to the saddle -- do you shorten the stem to compensate for the extra reach?

ericm979

My endurance bike is my race bike.

The the difference in reach will be small with a lower stem position (assuming frame angles and size and headtube are all identical). And if anything on a "race" fit you'd want a slightly longer reach.

San Rensho 

I don't think the fit would be any different. If they both have drop bars, your correct fit is your correct fit no matter the bike, you wouldn't change your posture from one bike to the other. The main difference in the bikes will be the geometry, which is independent of fit.

FlashBazbo

By definition, they're not.

FlashBazbo

Actually, you would have to. That's part of the point of the two different types of bikes.

cyclezen

I have both a '06 Sworks Tarmac and an '06 Roubaix
except for bar drop, my 'position' is set the same - same sitz point behind the BB, same saddle height, and since they both have the same 'apparent' TT length, same stem length and angle (120mm, set to -7 deg, so 'flat') - so same reach distance to bar and hoods..
The Roubaix being 25mm longer headtube, which, purposefully, I didn't re-adjust for.
The bar drop on the Roubaix is 6.5 cm, the bar drop on the Sworks is 9 cm.
I bought both because I wasn;t sure which, in the long run, I;d like more...
3 yrs later, I still like both equally. so I'll keep both.
I prefer the Roubaix ride for longer, more hilly rides. I use the Tarmac for the local hammerfests. I'd ride either well enough and be totally happy with either as the only bike.

'fit' is for 'position', which I prefer to keep the same, regardless of the road machine - bar drop being the least important element for me, since neither is either too high or too low.

jr59

Seat tube angle
Head tube size and angle
Chain stay length
Overall wheel base

These are only a few of the differences.
Not on all of them, but that is where I would start.

milliron

I think the main point is having a frame for people who would otherwise have a mountain of spacers on a "race" geometry frame.

pilechko

I like race geometry frames, so my "race" bike is also my "endurance" bike. I tried the Roubaix and it felt horribly sluggish to me.

pigmode

True for the most part. HT length on either the Tarmac or the Roubaix may fit different riders with different needs differently (heh). I chose the Roubaix to help recover from injuries. Having a short leg/long torso body-type, as I regained flexibility in the very end I could not get the handlebar drop I wanted.

In terms of handling, the Roubaix's long rear triangle and slack front end do slow things down, but I would still consider it a high performance bike. In terms of steering/turning on hard and fast sweepers, my impression is the Roubaix tends to need steady pressure on the inside drop. In other words, it sometimes needs to be counter-steered *through* the sweeper to oppose the slack geos tendency to want to straighten the frontend up. Also because it is less nimble, it is less forgiving if it enters a turn on a sloppy line. You have less options maneuvering *within* the turn than a quicker steering bike. OTH if your lines are spot on, it will turn well and with precision.

On a fast (45 mph) curving descent with gusting tradewinds on one of my rides, the Roubaix is rock solid. This with the winds hitting angled and head on, with the power of a gust to drop your speed 10+ mph, or shove the bike off its line by 2' in a second. Put me down as a fan of the Roubaix.