's Forum Archives - General

Archive Home >> General(1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 )

Frame Geometry - CycloCross vs. Standard Road(5 posts)

Frame Geometry - CycloCross vs. Standard Roadtxcross
May 20, 2003 10:10 AM
I recently got into road cycling and bought a cyclocross bike because of it's versatility and not really being sure how much I would enjoy the road. Now I'm hooked and am curious what, if any, advantages I will get by getting a true road bike. Here are the my current frame specs...

Size 53cm
Top Tube 53 cm
Head angle 73
Seat angle 73.5
Chainstay 42.5 cm
Wheelbase 98.8 cm
Fork rake 5 cm
BB Height 27.4 cm

Looking at the road specific bikes by the same manufacturer the main differences are a road bike would have

1) Longer top tube by 1cm
2) Shorter chainstay by 1.5 cm
3) Shorter wheelbase by 9 mm
4) Smaller fork rake by 8 mm
5) Shorter BB height 9mm
6) Head angle is the same but the seat angle is 74

Can anyone do anything with this. Will I notice any significant difference going to a true road bike?
re: Frame Geometry - CycloCross vs. Standard RoadJS Haiku Shop
May 20, 2003 10:21 AM
My Surly Cross-Check is the most comfortable frame I've ever ridden, and have done my longest road rides on it--to date, about 14 hours in the saddle. I've had eight other (standard geometry) road bikes so far.

Of course I know there are many things that contribute to fit and comfort, but I'll stick to my statement. Given the option to have only one bike for all types of riding, the Cross-Check would be it.

Size 56cm
Top Tube 57 cm
Head angle 72
Seat angle 72.5
Chainstay 42.0 cm
Wheelbase 101.98 cm
Fork rake 4.4 cm
BB Height (not sure, the Surly site appears to measure this one differently.)


it dependslaffeaux
May 20, 2003 10:25 AM
After buying a Ritchey Swiss Cross bike, I sold my road bike. The 'cross bike descended better (for me), climbed better (for me), and rode smoother (for me) than my road bike. I've test ridden many new bikes in the $2-$3 range, and have yet to find one that fits me as well and works any better. After just a few rides on the cross bike, I decided the whole idea of having a road-only bike seemed pretty pointly.

Everyone is different, and personal preferences play into nearly every component choice - including frame. Test ride a few nice road bikes and see which you prefer.
re: Frame Geometry - CycloCross vs. Standard Roadgeeker
May 20, 2003 11:41 AM
I'm kind of in the same boat. My only ride is a CX bike that I bought used. Have been thinking of adding a road bike, but ask myself "What would I want a road bike to do that the CX bike can't?" and haven't been able to justify the purchase. Eventually, I'll get a road bike, but the only compelling reason is better/custom fit. YMMV. Probably best to test-ride some road bikes.
re: Frame Geometry - CycloCross vs. Standard RoadSteve Bailey
May 21, 2003 10:40 AM
Most cross bikes are not that much different then a standard road racer with the exception of a beefier frame. canti's and a higher b-bracket.

My 3 thoughts are that

1) Road frames often can be made lighter as they are not used off road

2) Canti's/V's are not typically optimized to be used with road brifters, though adaptations are done, so you might see more responsive braking on a bike with dual pivots mated to road brifters.

3) All things being equal, a road bike with a lower b-bracket should handle better as the center of gravity is lower, especially in cornering and decending. Other's have indicated that their cross bikes handle/decend better then former road bikes, but it's a tough comparasion as the newer cross bike may simply fit better and/or be a better bike, as most folks use their experiences to move up to a better bike, thus naturally see an improvement.

Steve B.