Campag4life

As to 58 Tarmac, all depends on standover. If you can standover the bike, it will suit your long torso and long arms. Will low seat height relative to the height of the top tube, you can slam the stem for an aggressive fit if you choose. So I believe its a good choice...or a 56 with 130-140mm stem.

side_FX

Of course I would decide to read BF this morning right before I go out and pick up an Emonda. This would be the first thread I read. Every other Emonda review seems to comment on how smooth the ride is, but of course now this one will stick in my head. Maybe I'll just get the Tarmac instead. I am suffering from paralysis from analysis!!

bigdo13

lmao... my back is screaming just looking at that...

bigcicero

My bad, I apologize. I didn't mean to imply that you shouldn't post it here. I was just thinking that you would have more visibility into your question if it had its own separate thread where people could see it! I really wasn't sure of the answer... like you said, it's a bit tricky.

bigcicero

Oh no! I hope I didn't give the wrong impression. The Emonda has gotten a lot of rave reviews, and as someone posted earlier a lot of people have complimented its "ride quality". The is issue around the slightly subjective nature of the word "quality" and what it means to people. The Emonda is stiff and light and responsive, exactly the 'quality' most people want in a lightweight race bike. And was it harsher than my Caad? No. It felt firm and tough, like my Caad. But it wasn't harsh. And my Caad isn't exactly harsh, at least compared to old solid Alu bikes, though it's not forgiving over distances. But... it was surprisingly stiff and somewhat of a tense and buzzy ride. Maybe "harsh" was the wrong word to use. But it was "harsh" relative to my expectations, given the reviews that I read. Going back to the reviews, I realized they didn't necessarily say "comfortable". Undoubtedly your mileage will vary. You know how it is... new fit, new bike, new feeling, new road... they can color your perception a little bit.

Will you let us know if you purchased the Emonda? What did you think of it?

P.S. You're not the only one who suffers analysis paralysis, given my many musings on bikes here...

mercator

Sounds like you are doing a thorough search for the right bike. It also sounds like you are similar to me in terms of preference and (possibly) geometry. In my test rides, I quickly settled on the cervelo R3 as the nicest ride at my local shop, with the tarmac a close second. At the end of the process, I ended up with a Giant TCR advanced. You might want to try one.

bigcicero

Thanks for the tip. What was it that pushed you to the Giant?

I don't know what it is about the Cervelo. I can't quite understand why I feel such a large difference between the Cervelo and Tarmac at similar sizing, but I just really like the Cervelo. (I wish I could get the white R2 frame in all-R3 specs... I really like the white frame.)

bigcicero

You know what Stucky, I think that makes total sense. When you first entering the cycling world, you don't know what you don't know and you're overwhelmed by numbers and science. I imagine that once you overcome that learning curve, you realize that you should just ride for fun, as you say. That's a pretty good philosophy, as it takes a lot of the pressure off.

Next post... yesterday's 'final' test rides.

bigcicero

Okay, so yesterday I went back to LBS #2 and took 3 more test rides on two bikes I've already ridden: a 56 R2 and a 56 Tarmac. I was only able to take each ride for like 10 mins, so I wasn't able to glean the feel over a long ride so these are just first impressions. However, they're very telling.

First I rode the R2 set up 'straight out of the box' with stem all the way up. I mean, it's ridiculously comfortable. The stock setup is definitely a little heads up, but not as high as an 'endurance' bike like a Synapse. Really nice, really nimble, compliant, quick, pleasure to ride. I don't know how Cervelo does it. One minor nitpick: the R2, unlike it's R3 big sibling, is equipped with 105s but they cut some corners, and the brakes, which are FSA, are actually really weak. I would need them replaced. Other reviews confirm my observation.

Next I rode the Tarmac Expert, which was all Ultegra. Really nice bike and really great to ride. The head tube is something like 2.5cm lower so the drop is lower than the R2 right out of the box. I like the drop on the Tarmac actually, as I like the slightly more aero position. BUT... the bike didn't fit exactly right. My hamstrings felt pretty tight, and I felt wrist pressure at the end of my ride. It was minor, but I didn't feel those sensations on the R2. I realize the bike wasn't exactly fit to me, so maybe those things could get ironed out. Of course, a 50 mile ride might change my mind. In other words, it's not 100% perfect, but it's not bad: it's like an 80% fit match.

Lastly, for sake of comparison, I had them lower the stem on the R2 by about 2.5 cm to get the same position on the R2 as the Tarmac and rode it again. Again, I felt perfect on the R2. It seems that no matter what I do to the R2, I'm really comfortable on it. I just don't get how or why. In fact, it almost feels anti-climactic (or bland?) because I don't have to bear any stress from the ride, I just have to ride without thinking about fit.

I think I can make the Tarmac fit with a proper fitting process, but I'm not sure it's worth passing up the Cervelo with its excellent fit. However, what is throwing off my calculus is that I honestly want Ultegra on either one, and the shop is willing to sell me the Tarmac Comp for $2,600 in a white frame I really like; the equivalent Cervelo, the R3, is $3750 (I found one for $3275 at a shop I really don't like) but i'm not thrilled by the color of the R3. (I like the white of the R2.) So, do I pay extra for the fit? Or do I take the amazing value for the Tarmac and presume I can get the fit to work??

Let me throw in a wrinkle. This morning I rode my buddy's Tarmac in 58. As I mentioned above, I was eyeing the 58 Tarmac frame. His bike obviously wasn't set up for me and the saddle was a little high, but despite that I think I could make it work better than the size 56; I think it's because the bigger bike brought up the head tube and gave me a little extra reach. But even so, the Cervelo felt just like a great fit.

Summary: The Cervelo fits great and rides beautifully even with a healthy drop, but I think the Tarmac could work too but not positive and it's more affordable.

Stucky

Bigcic, it sounds like the Cervelo is "talking" to you. Don't make compromises when you find a bike like that, merely for a "better deal". You'll regret it for as long as you own the other bike, and always be wishing for the Cervelo. If you can afford it...get it. Or look for a used one, a year or two old; or just a frame on which you can put the components you want. Lots of options....but DO get the bike that speaks to you..... That what the test-riding process is all about- and you did it right, and it worked for you...and you were lucky, in that you found that bike which speaks to you, literally right from the start. Get it, and don't regret it!

Stucky

....and while Tarmacs are fine bikes, and I'm positive that the 'Mac could easily be made to fit you perfectly.....it's still not going to feel like the Cervelo; and you will ALWAYS be aware of that fact for as long as you'd own the Tarmac, if you were to buy it. Get the Cervelo! The cost difference will seem insignificant a year from now...but you'll be glad that you got the bike that "speaks to you" for many years to come.

I've never ridden a Cervelo....but you've got me wanting to try one!

mercator

Well, it was a while ago and things may have changed but the giant was a better deal - all dura-ace instead of ultegra and nicer wheels for about the same price. Geometry was similar enough that I could get either to fit me.

bigcicero

Thanks. Of course you're totally right and I appreciate the reminder to go with what feels right. This one actually had me right away, as you might recall from my initial comments. And you're also right that if I were to buy the Tarmac I would probably be bugged about the Cervelo.

I've been sitting here noodling over this and the R3 is the obvious winner.

I looked online for some used options and haven't found anything with the right specs yet. The frame changed for the 2014 model year, so it's basically 2014 or later. If I don't find anything in a couple days I'm going to suck it up and go with the sale price bike for $3,300. I need to do it quick because if that deal were to go away I would feel VERY dismayed! Hello, new bike!

Campag4life

OP....
basically your observations and btw, you are well written...a cut above on the 41...are conflating two things. First let me say, I know a lot about fit Basically you are making your judgment based upon which bike fits best over and above what separates the performance of each bike. This is quite common and a newb mistake. Basically it takes 3-4 good road bikes, a couple of pro fittings and a couple of years riding to begin to understand fit…things like saddle setback…what drop is best…even shifter position on the bars…or even dimensions of the handlebars in terms of reach and drop…what length cranks and ideal ratio of top tube and stem length. You haven't arrived at this pt....no fault..just lack of experience and why you are here. So you are are considering a pretty high end carbon bike without understanding your best fit. You don’t know what stack, reach and sta would work best for example. But here is the point. Either the R2 and Tarmac can be made to fit identically. The stack/reach/sta for both bikes isn’t that far apart but they ARE different and a different stem length and perhaps even riser or negative rise stem maybe required for preference on frame size which affects sta on the Tarmac…not on the Cervelo which are all 73 deg…and top tube length.

Another example…unless you are testing a 56 in either bike with 130-140mm stem, you are with the wrong fit as 6’ tall with long torso and long arms. So if you are testing with 110mm stem which comes std. on each bike, you are riding cramped which is no good for the performance fit you prefer. That is why the 58 works better. But you may prefer a 56 with your short legs because of your low saddle height and no need for a tall head tube. I am built exactly the opposite of you as a data point and have to have a 58 because of my long legs to get the head tube length I need such that I don’t run much drop. But for you, a 56cm with long stem makes more sense because of your low saddle height and better head tube length to not get your bars too high.

Both the R2 and Tarmac are superb bikes…but different. The Tarmac is a bit racier. This may or may not fit your preference. The R2 is a racey bike but with onus more on comfort or an all arounder. For some that maybe more like kissing your sister and which appreciate the edge of the Tarmac which btw isn’t too sharp as the Tarmac is a very friendly race bike.

A last note and more on a whimsical level you may appreciate. Do not buy a bike that you don’t LOVE the color…or shape. You must love the color and shape of the bike to be totally smitten. For example, I love the Cervelo in Red and even in white. But I am more a Specialized guy because I prefer their design decisions…I prefer their geometry, bottom bracket design and std seatpost…the R2 having a std. 27.2mm post as well…an important and often overlooked factor.

And finally...a suggestion. Save 1 grand and test a new Specialized Allez…which is an AL Tarmac…or a CAAD 12 with the groupset of your choice. Reason is…you need to learn more about your fit and better understand your best target for Stack, Reach and sta as it relates to saddle setback and your preferred fore/aft position on the bike for weight on your hands based upon bar height preference and even related to your watt output and typical ride duration. Saddle setback also affect distance to the handlebar for a given top tube length. A good fit should start with balancing a rider’s weight relative to the bottom bracket centerline based upon a given crank length target. Reach to the handlebar and handlebar height is based upon this saddle position.

Good luck

side_FX

Thanks for your follow up. I ended up not getting anything yet. The shop was really busy and I just hung around and stared at the pretty bikes for a while. The sales guys were busy working on getting the fit right for a lady on a trainer. It was my first time at this particular shop and I was impressed with the attention she was getting. It was more thorough than the old "here, stand over it and see if it fits" from other shops. I was happy just to stare at all the pretty bikes for a while.
i am still split between the Emonda vs. Tarmac. I am also debating on if I should spend 2K and get something at my talent level or spend 4K and have more bike than I'll ever really need.

bigcicero

Thanks for the tips and the compliment. I've been sitting around for the last couple days not thinking about this, as I wanted to approach with a fresh mind. As you picked up from my comments, I'm exactly searching for an ideal fit, plus a good next bike that I like. Thus, as you said, I'm looking for a fit AND a bike with certain characteristics that I like. As you alluded to, I realize it's going to take me some experimentation. If $$$ weren't a limiting factor, this would be easier. What makes this challenging, at least to me, is that I want a great all-around bike I'm going to like for a while, so I'm putting a lot of pressure on myself to pick the 'right' bike. If money weren't really an issue, I'd probably just get the R2 (or the on-sale R3 I found), knowing I'll like it as a comfortable all-around bike (as Stucky and I were discussing, it hit me as one I really liked), and then pick up another bike in 1-2 years that's a race bike as I've put more miles down. But I'm not sure if that's sound thinking.

Btw, I thought about the Caad12. That would be a scientific way to go about things... I'd upgrade my mis-sized Caad10 to the right size in the Caad12 and then find out what I like/dislike about the fit and the bike. But not sure, I did like the Cervelo

bigcicero

I'm curious to hear your thoughts on the difference between the two. Obviously from my thread here I gravitated toward the Tarmac.

Btw, I can't opine on fit, but it sounds like you answered your own question about the money. If it's more bike than you'll ever need, then maybe you don't really need to spend the dough. Unless you know you'll want to upgrade something on the bike. I've been contemplating the Cervelo R2 vs R3 - $2,500 vs sale price of $3350. I don't want to spend over $3k on a bike, but the price delta is much smaller than a couple upgrades like new wheels + some components. But even knowing that, were I settle on a Cervelo I would lean toward the R2 as it's a fine bike. Good luck!

RoadGuy

I was in the local bike shop today, and right at the door, they had a new 56cm Tarmac Comp Carbon with Ultegra in matte black for $1999 with a sign on it.

How's that for making your decision harder? Let me know if you're interested, and I'll pass you the shop's phone number.

bigcicero

Haha that makes it quite a bit harder... that's an amazing deal. Thanks for posting about it. However, as crazy as it is to say, I need to hold on for a couple weeks. I was going to post this separately as an update to this thread, but basically I'm going to get a pro fit done on Aug 24 to get some feedback on sizing and recommended geometry. I've been putzing around trying different fits and different bikes, so I decided I need to focus on fit first and get some recommendations. After that I'll focus on the bike. I might come back to you in 3 weeks to see if they still have the deal if I decide that the Tarmac suits me (although something tells me they wouldn't)

tangerineowl

^
Good idea.

Another bike in the mix:- the Bianchi Impulso (the Infinito is above your price range) is within a mm or so of the stack and reach numbers for the Cervelo R series bikes.

bigcicero

Thanks! Yeah I was looking at the Bianchis (I actually had another thread going about them), but I didn't realize their geometry was so close to the Cervelo. There's something about Bianchis I really like, though I'm not sure if they're still as good as the reputation that they used to have. After I get my fitting done, if the Bianchi is in my ideal fit zone, or whatever it's called, I'll test ride one.

Stucky

HAhaha! I always say that!

And fit-schmidt......the Cervelo will still feel the best to you- and I have a feeling, if you don't buy it, you'll regret it. Maybe they'll tell you that the Cervelo is "In your fit zone"[or whatever they say].....but maybe they'll recommend bikes that feel diametrically opposite of what feels good to you. Then what?

Listen to your body and your gut....you're not calculating the trajectory to the Moon- you're buying a bicycle!

Long Tom

If it's any consolation, at 6'4", I have a similar problem testing bikes.

Plus that, they stop doing half-sizes on shoes at size 12! Why? Are we Tall People somehow insensitive to shoe fit? I assure you, wee little people of Stonehenge, we are not.

On the positive side, I could swat 5'4" guy's shot out of the GYM, back in the day. Unless the little rat bastid scurried around me, leaving me feeling like one of those tree-people in LOTR.

bigcicero

Haha... well, if all goes well, that's the launch trajectory I'm going to try to take

I've been silent on this thread b/c I'm waiting to have my fit done on Aug 24. I'll post more after I have that finished. Yes, you're right - it's going to tell me what I probably already know. However, I'm doing this as much for the education and out of pure curiosity as I am to get an answer. And who knows, maybe it WON'T tell me what I'm expecting to hear. Call it... an expensive educational dabbling session.

Anyway, I'll post back more after my fit...

bigcicero

Hi all, I wanted to circle on this thread to close it out. I had a bunch of useful input from many folks, so I appreciate the input from all. Special shoutout to @Stucky for following along closely. Anyway, apologies for being dormant on this for a while... I've been on vacation for the last week and a half.

So the update is that I had a fit done on Aug 24 at Acme Bicycles in Brooklyn, which was pretty interesting... I'll post a separate thread about the fit process. After that I got a list of recommended bikes & configurations, and the Cervelo R2/R3 that I mentioned above that I liked was on the list. Thus, on Sept 1 I went ahead and bought the R3!

I ended up with the R3 in the penultimate paint style, which was Black with blue trim, and bought it at about $800 off, which helped. Among other bikes on the list was the Pinarello Gans, which I tested and loved. But the Cervelo was the one that really spoke to me when I rode it first and decided that my gut was 100% correct. I loved the way it rode and it felt like the fit was very good as soon as I got on the bike, so it's not surprising that the fit process confirmed that it was indeed a good fit for me. But though I felt that the Cervelo was the proper fit from gut feeling, the fit process wasn't wasted, as I learned a lot through it. And as a side note, the Caad10 size 54 that I own and which was my first bike, whose size I questioned in another thread, was nowhere near a proper size for me... it's no wonder it bugged me riding it so much.

I only had a chance to put on a couple 20 mi rides on the R3 after buying it before vacation, but I'm immensely pleased with it. It's amazingly light and nimble, and it isolates typical road buzz quite nicely. Definitely a great buy!

Many thanks for those who contributed their opinions to this as I close out my very involved process of buying a new bike. I learned a ton through reading on here and through my own independent research.

Cheers,
Cicero