Would you consider a Specialized Roubaix Sport to lean towards the endurance end?
08-29-21, 08:16 AM
#51
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2020
Posts: 76
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 57 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 8 Times
in
7 Posts
Thank you for taking the time to do the research in comparing the two. Having said that I guess I don't understand the logic of sitting up more upright in the bigger 56 size. When I rode my friend's 56 cm bike yesterday, I had to lean forward more to reach the handlebars, compared to my previous 54cm bike. This was especially noticeable when grabbing the drop bars for downhill runs. I assume this is because the seat post to handlebar distance is longer on the 56 cm. I was definitely sitting more upright on the 54 cm bike. I think the stem on the 56 cm which is a Trek ALR 5 gravel bike completely modded to be a road bike was normal sized.
A quick look at the Roubaix geometry shows that the 56 cm frame is 8 mm longer in reach and 20 mm higher in stack. Wheelbase is also 7 mm longer on the larger frame, which will make it slightly more stable at speed at the expense of slightly slower handling response. If you are between sizes as it appears, then I would choose based primarily on the stack height. The 54 cm frame would allow a more aggressive position with lower bars, while the 56 cm would allow a more upright position. 20 mm difference is quite significant. The reach should be easily adjusted by stem length as required.
There is no right answer here, it's what you feel most comfortable with. Pro racers tend to size down on their frames for a more slammed position and responsive handling, while older/less flexible riders might size up for a more upright position and stable handling, especially if they are looking for an endurance fit. Personally I sit right between a 58 cm and 56 cm frame, but I always size up for a slightly less aggressive position for endurance. But I'm not naturally very flexible and have relatively long legs, so a 58 cm usually fits better.
There is no right answer here, it's what you feel most comfortable with. Pro racers tend to size down on their frames for a more slammed position and responsive handling, while older/less flexible riders might size up for a more upright position and stable handling, especially if they are looking for an endurance fit. Personally I sit right between a 58 cm and 56 cm frame, but I always size up for a slightly less aggressive position for endurance. But I'm not naturally very flexible and have relatively long legs, so a 58 cm usually fits better.
08-29-21, 09:46 AM
#52
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2020
Posts: 76
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 57 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 8 Times
in
7 Posts
OK, I think I see what you mean. The following are pictures of my old 54cm Cannondale (the one without pedals) and the 56cm Trek I rode yesterday. It's hard to tell from the pictures as the perspective was slightly different for both of them but yes, the plane of the saddle compared to the plane of the handlebars is slightly higher on the 54cm Cannondale. However still the total distance between the top of saddle at center post to the handlebars is still a good inch shorter on the 54cm Cannondale vs the 56cm Trek. It seemed this was quite noticeable when riding. Perhaps another influencer though is the handlebar diameter of the 54cm Cannondale is smaller than the Trek of which having smallish hands for a guy, I prefer the feel of the smaller bars.
Thank you for taking the time to do the research in comparing the two. Having said that I guess I don't understand the logic of sitting up more upright in the bigger 56 size. When I rode my friend's 56 cm bike yesterday, I had to lean forward more to reach the handlebars, compared to my previous 54cm bike. This was especially noticeable when grabbing the drop bars for downhill runs. I assume this is because the seat post to handlebar distance is longer on the 56 cm. I was definitely sitting more upright on the 54 cm bike. I think the stem on the 56 cm which is a Trek ALR 5 gravel bike completely modded to be a road bike was normal sized.
A quick look at the Roubaix geometry shows that the 56 cm frame is 8 mm longer in reach and 20 mm higher in stack. Wheelbase is also 7 mm longer on the larger frame, which will make it slightly more stable at speed at the expense of slightly slower handling response. If you are between sizes as it appears, then I would choose based primarily on the stack height. The 54 cm frame would allow a more aggressive position with lower bars, while the 56 cm would allow a more upright position. 20 mm difference is quite significant. The reach should be easily adjusted by stem length as required.
There is no right answer here, it's what you feel most comfortable with. Pro racers tend to size down on their frames for a more slammed position and responsive handling, while older/less flexible riders might size up for a more upright position and stable handling, especially if they are looking for an endurance fit. Personally I sit right between a 58 cm and 56 cm frame, but I always size up for a slightly less aggressive position for endurance. But I'm not naturally very flexible and have relatively long legs, so a 58 cm usually fits better.
There is no right answer here, it's what you feel most comfortable with. Pro racers tend to size down on their frames for a more slammed position and responsive handling, while older/less flexible riders might size up for a more upright position and stable handling, especially if they are looking for an endurance fit. Personally I sit right between a 58 cm and 56 cm frame, but I always size up for a slightly less aggressive position for endurance. But I'm not naturally very flexible and have relatively long legs, so a 58 cm usually fits better.
08-29-21, 05:51 PM
#53
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 8,451
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4416 Post(s)
Liked 4,872 Times
in
3,016 Posts
OK, I think I see what you mean. The following are pictures of my old 54cm Cannondale (the one without pedals) and the 56cm Trek I rode yesterday. It's hard to tell from the pictures as the perspective was slightly different for both of them but yes, the plane of the saddle compared to the plane of the handlebars is slightly higher on the 54cm Cannondale. However still the total distance between the top of saddle at center post to the handlebars is still a good inch shorter on the 54cm Cannondale vs the 56cm Trek. It seemed this was quite noticeable when riding. Perhaps another influencer though is the handlebar diameter of the 54cm Cannondale is smaller than the Trek of which having smallish hands for a guy, I prefer the feel of the smaller bars.
08-29-21, 06:06 PM
#54
Method to My Madness
Join Date: Nov 2020
Location: Orange County, California
Posts: 3,664
Bikes: Trek FX 2, Cannondale Synapse, Cannondale CAAD4, Santa Cruz Stigmata GRX
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1948 Post(s)
Liked 1,472 Times
in
1,020 Posts
08-29-21, 06:44 PM
#56
Method to My Madness
Join Date: Nov 2020
Location: Orange County, California
Posts: 3,664
Bikes: Trek FX 2, Cannondale Synapse, Cannondale CAAD4, Santa Cruz Stigmata GRX
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1948 Post(s)
Liked 1,472 Times
in
1,020 Posts
08-30-21, 12:18 PM
#57
Junior Member
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 6
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
Mine too
You may want to go back and ride that bike again. I work at a Spec dealer and all of our future shock 1.5 equipped bikes have been showing up without a spring installed at all. They have always had the medium springs installed from the factory but somewhere in the last six months, they have been shipping with none. Spec never sent us a notification of the change so, it is quite possible that the bike you rode was springless as well…
