Cyclocross - CX forum doesn't seem particularly active

So I'll just ask a question to get things moving.

I was looking at a 2008 Specialized Rockhopper and 2008 Specialized TriCross Comp. The tricross is twice the price of the Rockhopper. What's so good about the TriCross? The wheels dont seem to be as strong (less spokes, narrower width), tires aren't as good for trail work, frame is Al (a 2008 Specialized Tarmac Elite is the same price and has a carbon frame, a 2008 Tarmac Comp is also carbon and has better components and is only a touch dearer than TriCross Comp).

What's the point of this thread? I dunno. I guess I've found deals on Rockhopper and Tricross and am wondering why I should spend the extra money on a Tricross. I like Tricross better coz: it's more road oriented, lighter, doesn't have suspension forks, mainly 105 components. But RH is still tougher on the trails.. and will get me more exercise with those fat knobby tires. It's also half the price. So what am I waiting for? Your views.

Besides, this CX forum deserves more threads.

Well, it all depends where the majority of your riding is going to be. :)

well, I'm pretty sure the Rockhopper is a MTN bike right? If it is the lower end Rockhopper, it's going to be heavy and low end components. The Tricross is a cross bike (which are usually a little higher end), and wil be much lighter and may have some higher end components.

While you can certainly race cross with a Mtn bike, you'll have a lot better time on cross bike. For a comparison, I weighed my Kona Fire Mtn (lower end mtn bike) the other day...it was 35#! My Salsa Las Cruces cross bike (nice frame with cheaper components) weighs 22# with the seat bag, that's alot less weight to haul around a cross course for 30-60 minutes! You can use a wrench as a hammer, but why would you when you can get a hammer that does the job better?

Yeah, all those bikes you mentioned are for different purposes. You can use them all for the same purpose, but each will be better at specific things. The Tricross is a decent cyclocross bike and with slight modifications (tires) you can use it as a decent road bike. The Rockhopper is a pure mountain bike. Nothing more, nothing less. It's more suited on single track trails. It wouldn't be an acceptable road bike. The Tarmac is a pure road bike. While you could change the tires and put small cyclocross tires on it, it would make a crappy cyclocross bike.

What's great about the Tricross? It's a pretty decent do-it-all type of bike. If you could only have one of the bikes mentioned above, it'd be the Tricross. If you could have 3, get all 3.

CX forum doesn't seem particularly active?!

YOU don't seem particularly active!

*storms off in a huff*

CX forum doesn't seem particularly active?!

YOU don't seem particularly active!

*storms off in a huff*

Huhh, shrugs shoulders and rolls eyes. Not quite sure what you're getting at.

i think everyone's out riding. 'tis the season, you know.

i think everyone's out riding. 'tis the season, you know.

+1

This is the forum where most members ride more than they post.

I tend to post here only in the season too and mostly in the racing sub forum. We are still a small tight knit group and I like that.

Huhh, shrugs shoulders and rolls eyes. Not quite sure what you're getting at.

I was kidding ... teh internets suck at conveying sarcasm unless you resort to ye olde smilie.

:trainwreck:

So I'll just ask a question to get things moving.

I was looking at a 2008 Specialized Rockhopper and 2008 Specialized TriCross Comp. The tricross is twice the price of the Rockhopper. What's so good about the TriCross? The wheels dont seem to be as strong (less spokes, narrower width), tires aren't as good for trail work, frame is Al (a 2008 Specialized Tarmac Elite is the same price and has a carbon frame, a 2008 Tarmac Comp is also carbon and has better components and is only a touch dearer than TriCross Comp).

What's the point of this thread? I dunno. I guess I've found deals on Rockhopper and Tricross and am wondering why I should spend the extra money on a Tricross. I like Tricross better coz: it's more road oriented, lighter, doesn't have suspension forks, mainly 105 components. But RH is still tougher on the trails.. and will get me more exercise with those fat knobby tires. It's also half the price. So what am I waiting for? Your views.

Besides, this CX forum deserves more threads.

no, you'll get the same amount of exercise, you'll just be faster on the tricross ;)

HIJACK

Why are the single speeders turning faster lap times than the B's? Thus, why am I racing a geared bike? Those SS guys are freaky fast.

You should buy the tricross (this is a CX thread)

Singlespeed is optimal in the mud.

Very highly dependent on the course.

you should really consider the type(s) of riding you want to do before you set your heart on a bike. also make sure you are not buying a bike based on components, those are the cheaper things to fix/replace. if cross is something you are interested in doing, check it out and test ride a few bikes. moreover go talk to your local shop and have them show you some different things...just have fun.

I was kidding ... teh internets suck at conveying sarcasm unless you resort to ye olde smilie.

:trainwreck:

Sorry about that. You're right on conveying sarcasm though.

A couple of threads in the Texas forum, that you might have missed if you're not from there:
http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=483585
http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=491909

So I'll just ask a question to get things moving.

I was looking at a 2008 Specialized Rockhopper and 2008 Specialized TriCross Comp. The tricross is twice the price of the Rockhopper.

Buy both!