Long Distance Competition/Ultracycling, Randonneuring and Endurance Cycling - Are cross bikes good for distance events?

Many are steel, they've got slightly wider tires...is this a good route to go, or should a randonneur stick with a bike designed for the purpose?

If you are comfortable on the bike and it meets your needs as far as components and carrying capacity it doesn't matter what frame you are on.

There's arguments for and against.
Wide tire clearance with fenders
Higher bb than a standard road bike
Canti brakes
The list could go on, but like Homeyba stated; if you're comfortable on it, then go ride the hell out of it. I have a Cross Check and I'm going after my SR on it this year.

There aren't many differences between most cross and rando-specific bikes. I doubt you'd even notice the one that really can't be changed, namely the slightly higher BB.

The main thing to watch for IMO is that some cross bikes are made more for cross racing than for general purposes. Just make sure the bike fits, has the gearing you want, and that the geometry isn't too aggressive.

Lots of people use them for light touring - why not go with them as LD bikes as well?

Might as well just ask the question like this:

What kind of bike is good for riding... The answer is the same! And is the same as the last 200 times this question was asked. If it fits...

There are appropriate CX bikes for long rides, even long and fast rides. I've done several 200Ks on a cross bike (with 32C tires, to boot!) without difficulty. And I remember Bryce Walsh racing the National 24-Hour Challenge on a CX bike back in '05 -- he rode something like 430 miles that year in 24 hours. An Ohio friend of mine has done at least one full, very hilly, brevet series on a CX bike. Question is, is that kind of bike appropriate for you and the kind of riding you want to do and the characteristics you're looking for in an LD bike?

FWIW, I do notice the higher BB when I switch between my road bikes and the CX bike; the handling and cornering is noticeably different. Not different in any way that I personally care about it, but it is noticeable.

This works for me: I change out my road bike crankset (50-34) to a cyclocross (46-34) crankset if I am going to ride a long hilly route. While I am looking for another bike that fit me as well (this one fits perfect/Rocky Mt Solo 30) this works as a good compromise for me. This is a light bike. My other strategy for decent ride times is to work hard to keep my weight low.

The main thing to watch for IMO is that some cross bikes are made more for cross racing than for general purposes. Just make sure the bike fits, has the gearing you want, and that the geometry isn't too aggressive.

I have done a couple of centuries on my race oriented cross bike (Kona Major Jake). It is really not that different from my road bikes and certainly no slower when set up for road. I think what Bacc. is referring to above may be the frames that are lacking water bottle mounts, etc.. Geometry, for the most part, should not be a problem.

I'll add that most general-purpose Cyclocross bike are better suited to long distance riding than the typical race oriented road bike seen at most bike shops.

The usual general-purpose Cyclocross bikes has room for larger tires, fender & rack mounts and a taller headtube that provides for a more relaxed riding position.

Many road bikes cannot easily accept tires larger than 700x23, racks or fenders. There are exceptions, the Salsa Casseroll triple is a road bike that fits larger tires and fenders easily.

Fit is foremost. I would compare carefully before deciding against a Cyclocross bike.

Michael