Cyclocross Racing - Flat bars for a Cyclocross bike?

OK, I know very, very little about CX, so here's the deal. I did my first CX race on a mountain bike the other day. I noticed that in the brake zones after a downhill (into a hairpin), I was killing guys on the brakes. Not 1 or 2 guys, everyone I ran up to. It's not that I'm such a great braker or was being crazy. I was just doing what seemed right. I do have disks on my bike, though, so my braking power was significantly better than the CX bikes.

Anyway, after thinking about it, I figured that most of the guys were probably only using the front brake into that corner because they had to downshift with their right hand and you can't downshift and brake with an STI shifter. I've run into the same problem on my road bike coming up to a stop sign. So would there be an advantage to running a CX bike with a flat bar setup instead of drop bars? In the race I did, no one was even coming close to getting in their drops. It wasn't fast enough for a long enough period of time for the aero advantage of drops to even start to show up.

I can definitely see the advantage of running a CX bike as opposed to a mountain bike, but the ability to brake and downshift at the same time seemed like a pretty big advantage in my favor. Am I missing something?

Also, why does everyone run canti brakes instead of V-brakes?

When previewing the course, they should have figured out what gear they would need at the bottom of the hill and they should have been in that gear without needing to shift as they descended. On v-brakes, I don't know really, don't cantis have better mud clearance? Just a guess. I don't worry about it, or the "advantages" of discs, because in cross you are going to be at the limit of traction with your tires long before you exceed the braking capacity of any of those brakes.

So would there be an advantage to running a CX bike with a flat bar setup instead of drop bars? In the race I did, no one was even coming close to getting in their drops. It wasn't fast enough for a long enough period of time for the aero advantage of drops to even start to show up.

I can definitely see the advantage of running a CX bike as opposed to a mountain bike, but the ability to brake and downshift at the same time seemed like a pretty big advantage in my favor. Am I missing something?

Also, why does everyone run canti brakes instead of V-brakes?A lot of folk prefer flat bars for cross, but they are forbidden in UCI-sanctioned races, and there is definitely a trickle-down effect to local races. Before they were nixed by the UCI, Thomas Frischknecht had a great deal of success with flat bars, including a 2nd place in the 1997 Cross World Championships.

If I were using drop bars on a fast descent going into a hairpin, I would be in the drops, because that's where you get best grip on the brakes. I'm surprised the other guys in your race weren't doing the same.

Cantis give the maximal mud clearance and they work well with short pull (road) brake levers. Some guys use V-brakes with travel agents and they work fine, but it's that same trickle-down effect, the elite pros all seem to use cantis.

I appreciate both answers, thanks.

92D: As far as the downshifting goes, I agree, as far as gear selection. My point was that you can't physically brake and downshift at the same time with an STI shifter where as on a mountain bike trigger setup, you can. (on a gripshift, you can't brake and downshift at that same time, either, same problem as STI).

I agree that pretty much any brake system can lock the tires. Having said that, the change to disks on my mountain bike has been a huge difference because I have to use very little lever pressure. This gives me more control of the bike because I'm not white knuckling the brakes.


Flargle: Great history lesson. Frischknecht must have been the wrong nationality. In that one decent, I'm sure the other guys were still having issues with locking the brakes, even on the hoods. Let's face it, it was my first race, I wasn't against the pro's!

The Canti vs. V-brake thing is interesting. I guess I'd think the mud would have to be pretty serious before Canti-s were an advantage. I doubt I'll ever race in Belgium where they really mess around in the muck, so I might think about using them in favor of canti's in the future.

Having said that, the change to disks on my mountain bike has been a huge difference because I have to use very little lever pressure. This gives me more control of the bike because I'm not white knuckling the brakes.

The Canti vs. V-brake thing is interesting. I guess I'd think the mud would have to be pretty serious before Canti-s were an advantage. I doubt I'll ever race in Belgium where they really mess around in the muck, so I might think about using them in favor of canti's in the future.Two more comments/thoughts:

1) There's none of the sustained descending in CX that you get in XC. So, nevermind that disc brakes are verboten in UCI-sanctioned cross races, they come with a weight penalty that might (might) not be worth the better performance.

2) I am going to try a mini-V on my front, because I just switched to an all-carbon fork and it squeals like a pig, and word on the streets is that mini-Vs work very well with carbon forks to eliminate brake squeal. And if that works, I might just switch out the rear for mini-V as well. There is no consensus whether a travel agent is needed for mini-Vs with road levers. Here are photos of a couple of mini-V setups:

http://forums.roadbikereview.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=139835&stc=1&d=1221348141

http://forums.roadbikereview.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=139901&stc=1&d=1221411152

I just looked through the USCF rulebook. It's basically as open as can be in terms of the actual bike. Unless I'm missing something, it's pretty much open season.

I just looked through the USCF rulebook. It's basically as open as can be in terms of the actual bike. Unless I'm missing something, it's pretty much open season.You are correct.

There are idiotic rumors that circulate about how disc brakes and/or flat bars are forbidden in cross. Yes, they are forbidden in UCI-sanctioned races, but even in races with a UCI-sanctioned pro division, the rules don't apply to the other races being run at the same venue (even the U.S. national championships).

Almost all local CX series flyers include some sort of statement that mtbs are fine as long as you don't use bar-end extensions.

There are certain features of a cross bike that undoubtedly make it faster than a mtb over the vast majority of CX courses: light weight, 700c wheels, narrower tires, no suspension. But the handlebars and brakes are matters for debate and variety.

There are certain features of a cross bike that undoubtedly make it faster than a mtb over the vast majority of CX courses: light weight, 700c wheels, narrower tires, no suspension.

My mountain bike is relatively light, probably 21/22# in race trim, I can't complain much there. The right wheels/tires would have made a world of difference, though, and not having a pogo stick front end when I was out of the saddle would also have been really nice. In the end, though, it was still a great experience.

There is no consensus whether a travel agent is needed for mini-Vs with road levers.

i'd say the main disagreement is in how you define the term "needed." i ran mini v's with regular sti's for awhile before i knew any better and in order to keep the levers from bottoming out the pads sat very close to the rim. with my wheels trued that wasn't a huge deal, but mud clearance is essentially nil.

such a setup gets you very high mechanical advantage, arguably unnecessarily high given the traction on most cross courses. they felt very soft, which isn't necessarily a bad thing, it really depends how hard you like to squeeze your brakes.

they do stop your bike, and you can run them without issue, but for me it was worth getting the travel agents to make it feel like a normal brake.