Cyclocross - Specialized Tricross Ride Quality....

I am considering replacing my Look 555 carbon fiber road bike frame with a Specialized Tricross Aluminum with carbon stays and front fork. The reason is because I ride on broken road surfaces a fair amount and the biggest tire I can put on my Look 555 is 25mm. I am thinking either the 32mm knobby or even a 28mm wide slick would be much more comfortable than racing bike tires. I can forgo some speed for comfort.
Question is...is the Aluminum Specialized Tricross considered a compliant frame? I really don't want to ante up for the Sworks carbon fiber version if I can avoid it. I love the geometry of the Tricross and why it is at the top of my short list...but wondering if the Aluminum frame would partly defeat my intent of seeking better ride quality...recognizing at the end of the day, tires generally trump frame rigidity when it comes to ride.
I would sure appreciate your advice.
Thanks.

I can't help you regarding the Tricross, but re tyres see http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=566655 - you probably won't have to give up any speed at all. If you ride the Tricross and don't like it then you might want to consider a Cotic Roadrat - similar idea, but boutique all steel, and can take disk or rim brakes, be built fixed or geared, etc.

About Spec designs in general: be wary about falling for paying for upgrades to models with more carbon in - the ride softening effect in my experience isn't noticeable. Spend your money on better tyres instead - tyre and tube quality make a difference to ride as well as width.

I quite like the ride of my Tricross Expert. The Zertz inserts in the seatpost, stays and forks do a lot to dampen road vibration. I ride primarily road on 23's but all fall and winter on 32 knobbies. Specialized offered a model with disk brakes which is not compliant so stay away from them if you intend to race UCI events.

My bikes are mostly made from steel. The Singlecross is one exception. Sometimes when I hit bumps or go over rough stuff I can still be surprised at just how good the Tricross frame rides. Specialized has never made a disc brake version Tricross.

I've owned several Trek aluminum bikes and have learned to hate aluminum. I got a Tricross Comp a couple of years ago and have come to realize that it's not the material at all, it's how it's made. My Tricross doesn't have the carbon stays either and it's as comfortable as my Specialized Roubaix Comp, which is full carbon. I've ridden my Tricross on several centuries and it was very comfortable the entire ride. Felt much better at the end than I did with any other bike. I run 25's on mine so if you went with an even larger tire, you should be even more comfortable.

Seriously, this is a great bike. If mine was stolen or broken today, I'd buy another one tomorrow.

Specialized has never made a disc brake version Tricross.

Oops, my bad. Thumbing through catalogues, it was the Cannondale cx7 I was thinking of. Sorry!

Its the tires that give a good ride on cracked roads- slick tread anf flexy sidewalls in 32 or 35. Carbon damps road vibration on good roads.

Thank you guys. Knobster...quite a ringing endorsement for the Tricross that an aluminum frame bike could rival the ride quality of the CF Roubaix known for its cushy ride quality. Also...your distinction of tube geometry and construction making the difference seems to trump frame material as you say...thanks for reinforcing that. Seems as though the Tricross by many is considered comfortable with many different tire widths.

Andrew...if you would...could you embellish a bit on why CF damps road vibration more on good roads...or it sets itself apart more on smoother roads? Seems as though CF would benefit on all road surfaces.

Thanks again.

Its the tires that give a good ride on cracked roads- slick tread anf flexy sidewalls in 32 or 35. Carbon damps road vibration on good roads.

Tricross Comp rider here, fun, fitness and commute on pretty crappy pavement. Actually, it is all three components - tires take care of cracks and small bumps, CF mutes road "static" and fork and seatstays are curved to absorb mega jolts, like hopping down the curb or hitting occasional pothole up to an inch deep. I do not even bother to swerve for one - wheels and frame can take it no problem. Keep fatter tires, tho - wheels are very rigid.

Have Fun

SF

The ability to run tires 32/35 + is the reason I ride cross bikes.

Andrew...if you would...could you embellish a bit on why CF damps road vibration more on good roads...or it sets itself apart more on smoother roads? Seems as though CF would benefit on all road surfaces.Thanks again.

Metals (except lead) are not good vibration dampers. That is why bells are made of bronze, brass or iron, and not plastic, and coil springs on cars are fitted with hydraulic dampers. The plastic matrix in which the carbon fibres are embedded have similar damping qualities to a firm cheese. This damping quality will not transmit the buzz you get from riding over smoothish asphalt. For absorbing bumps from cracks and potholes you need a system that gives deflection. Curved forks and seat stays look like they do that, but in reality they wont deflect more than a couple of mm, I think they make the bike look better. A 32 mm tire can deflect up to nearly 20 mm when it hits a pothole without pinching the tube.

I have a Tricross Expert and have been quite astonished by the ride quality. The zertz stuff is cool looking but whether or not it makes a difference is beyond me. I can say this...even with 23's on the stock rims the bike is very, VERY supple on even the nastiest tarmac. Now...that is throwing stones when you slip on 32's or even my big ol' 45's! It becomes a couch!

Metals (except lead) are not good vibration dampers. That is why bells are made of bronze, brass or iron, and not plastic, and coil springs on cars are fitted with hydraulic dampers. The plastic matrix in which the carbon fibres are embedded have similar damping qualities to a firm cheese. This damping quality will not transmit the buzz you get from riding over smoothish asphalt. For absorbing bumps from cracks and potholes you need a system that gives deflection.

100% agree until the last bit.

Carbon fibre doesn't resonate - it would make an awful bell of tuning fork. Resonance comes into play, however, only in tuning forkish situations - when something is free to vibrate. Touch a tuning fork and it goes silent. A chainstay or fork under load isn't free in this way; road buzz is not a resonance phenomenon - if it was than it would disappear and reappear very sharply at particular speeds. It's simply a succession of small impacts. The smart way to kill buzz (other than wider tyres) is simply to add something like poron (used to protect electronic components from shock and vibration) as a wrap to the handlebars and maybe the seat (it is used this way in recumbent seats). However this solution would be cheap and effective and would involve "up-selling" people to more expensive bikes with magic frame materials - Specialized being the greatest masters of this art.

Interesting thread of carbon and zertz (which might have quite a limited lifetime) here:

http://forums.roadbikereview.com/showthread.php?t=61266

I'd expect carbon to be much more effective in components with more room to flex - the main tubes, handlebars, and seatpost. I'd still bet the poron wrapper though!

Incidentally, can anyone explain how the carbon fibre in the tricross sport works? In particular, the seatpost appears to be carbon fibre on the outside, but inside appears to be a cylinder of aluminum. In which case, does the CF still provide much benefit? Meanwhile, the bottom half of the fork is CF, but has brazeons for racks. Presumably there is some metal in there too?

Incidentally, can anyone explain how the carbon fibre in the tricross sport works? In particular, the seatpost appears to be carbon fibre on the outside, but inside appears to be a cylinder of aluminum. In which case, does the CF still provide much benefit? Meanwhile, the bottom half of the fork is CF, but has brazeons for racks. Presumably there is some metal in there too?

Spec designs are very hard to analyze - they mix genuine innovation and engineering with shameless whoring. The Tricross is a great bike, but as for that seatpost - well, I remember when I was thinking of buying one I had it down as a "remove" - I'm 220lb and Spec's warnings about the post not being strong enough for offroad use bothered me! We're into I-dunno territory here on both those. Someone in the Framebuilding forum might be able to help you. I'd be interested to know.

My ***guess*** is the carbon does function structurally in the post, but that the design isn't optimum, and that you're right about the rack attachments going to metal... But I have no confidence at all in either guess!

Incidentally, can anyone explain how the carbon fibre in the tricross sport works? In particular, the seatpost appears to be carbon fibre on the outside, but inside appears to be a cylinder of aluminum. In which case, does the CF still provide much benefit? Meanwhile, the bottom half of the fork is CF, but has brazeons for racks. Presumably there is some metal in there too?

This is called carbon wrapped. Purely for astetics.

I would assume that the brazeons are just like the brazeons for the water bottle cages on any carbon framed bike. Rivets.

Seatpost not strong enough for offroad? Hmm. I thrash mine pretty hard. On my last ride, I was in a group of about 22 dual suspension, 3 hardtails...and me. :) OTOH, who sits on the seat of a suspensionless bike when going hard off road?