Originally Posted by i_r_beej
Wellll...
Take a good look at the Scott. It doesn't look like the frame or fork has clearance for knobby CX tires. You can do a side-by-side and pay attention to the distance between the bottom of the head-tube and the top of the tire. You can see how the Volpe has quite a bit more clearance. It's more difficult to tell at the seat- and chain-stays. The Scott also has a triple crankset. When you get in goopy mud, that extra chainring is a liability. Many cyclocrossers convert to a SINGLE chainring as shifting is really fairly minimal compared to other types of riding. (I know-- i rode my MTB my first season of CX and the triple crank just gummed up with mud and ceased functioning!)
Also, you'll be paying more for the Bianchi brand-name, despite the fact that most of their frames are made in TAIWAN!
When i was shopping for a 'cross bike (for actual cyclocross racing) i noticed that Bianchis were significantly more than similarly spec'd competitors.
In the final analysis-- a "hybrid" is really designed with pavement in mind, despite the presence of canti brakes. The bike it doubtless aimed at touring. A cyclocross bike is designed with ALL surfaces in mind. pavement, dirt, grass, mud, mud, mud, snow, whatever.
If you're going to race 'cross, get a 'cross bike. If you just want a touring/commuter bike, get a hybrid.
I'm pretty sure the Scott pictured in the link is a small size with 26" wheels. So the comparison given by i_r_beej doesn't apply... no offense dog. If you compare geometries however, you'd see that the Scott size medium and the Volpe 52 are VERY similar. The only real difference being the Bianchi's chainstay length of 43 vs. the chainstay length of 45cm on the Scott. This can result in either a lower BB or a longer wheelbase... as the seat tube angles seem to be very similar as well. Of course, the scott has V brakes, not canti brakes. but that can easily be switched out later as the brake mounts are the same.