Timbike2

Purchased a Novara Randonee over the weekend for my 28 mile round trip commute. Nice bike, I like the drop handle bars and STI shifters. Kind of heavy, but it's steel and a nice ride. I ride 80% paved roads, but the rest is on gravel roads. The Randonee comes with 700x32 tires. Would I be better off with a cross bike for this type of commute? I can still return the Randonee. I had looked real hard at Specialized TriCross Sport triple, but the 20% off coupon from REI seemed too good to pass up the Randonee. May be just having buyers remorse--always second guessing myself.

g00se

I suppose it depends upon your riding style, distance and any kind of luggage you need to carry.

Tourers are designed for relaxed long distances - CX bikes are set up for aggressive races. A CX bike on a long commute may be faster and more fun but it could be a bit tiring over a long way.

cyccommute 

I'd put it a different way. Touring bikes are made to carry stuff for long distances. Cross bikes really aren't. Cross bikes are race bikes that may/or may not carry stuff well but they do go better in mud than a conventional road race bike.

Stick with the Randonee if you can only have road bike that you want to do a lot of stuff on. It'll handle the dirt roads just fine...as well as a cross bike...while carrying 50 lbs of stuff.

HardyWeinberg

I think the big feature of cross bikes for offroading is not so much extra tire clearance (the randonee may fit bigger tires than 32 anyway) but an elevated BB to make mid-race bunny-hopping easier. That's not something you're going to run into on gravel roads too much.

What kind of gravel do you have? The railroad ballast I was dealing with for a while, no road or cross tire could handle, needed to get to 2" or bigger to float across the top of that stuff.

London commuter

I think you'd be fine with either. Most cross bikes can be set up something like a light tourer (eg by not cutting the steer tube too short, fitting a rack, mudguards etc) and do the job pretty well. IMO the most important difference that you can't change is the cross bike will have shorter chainstays than the tourer, especially since compact frames are in fashion for racing types now. This could make it a bit less stable compared to the tourer for going in straight lines for a long time.

I did a 2000km camping tour two summers ago on a cross bike with rear panniers and a handlebar bag and it was fine in this duty. Any more luggage and I'd have needed front panniers too and a proper tourer would have made sense for the extra carrying ability but as I say, it was just fine.

I ride a cross bike to work. It is fine. If I had a tourer I might ride that and I'm sure it would be fine too. If I had to pick between them for a commute I'd say the distance is short enough that the cross bike will be more fun and the long distance qualities of the tourer aren't going to come into play too much. Then again, if you want to be more relaxed, the tourer would be better. If you manage to work in little sections of off road into your commute, the MTB-inspired handling of the cross bike could well make it a lot more suited but then most tourers don't mind a bit of off road either.

I don't see that it matters too much. Enjoy your bike :-)

LeeG

you're having buyers remorse. A light bike is always enjoyable but the question "will I be better off?" really isn't answerable without defining "better". You're better off than buying the Tri-Cross because you didn't spend an extra $300. My $.02 is get a Pasela TG or T-Serv tire in 35mm and put it on the front for the 20% that's on dirt roads. It's a nice tire and a lot cheaper than switching bikes.

Seems to me that if you were swayed by the price the of the Randonner over the TriCross then the bike wasn't the deciding factor anyway. If the Tricross gets loaded down with gear it'll be work up hills, if you spend $300 for very light wheels and load the bike down it'll still be work up hills.

CliftonGK1

The Randonee is a kick-ass bike. One of my brevet partners rides one (and unless the frame specs have changed, you can throw 35mm tires with fenders on there) and has done rides up to 1000km on it. (not a typo. One. Thousand. Kilometers. 75 hour time limit.)

It's heavier than a most cross bikes, but it's not designed for racing. It's a cyclotourist bike. The Randonee isn't really meant for heavy loaded touring, IMO. The stays are still a little short for loaded panniers, and although it can accept a lowrider rack up front, the stock gearing is a little steep on the low-end for a touring rig (26/28, as opposed to a 26/32 or 26/34).
It's excellent for rough roads: Chip seal, potholes, hardpack dirt, crushed gravel, gravel paths... with the right tire selection this bike goes anywhere.
It's great for light, fast touring (randonneuring, ultralight camping, etc.), and commuting.
A benefit over a CX bike is that the stays are longer, so you can run a set of panniers (although if you have really big feet, you might want a rack that sits far back), and the low center of gravity. CX bikes have a tall bottom bracket for clearing obstacles. This makes them "tippy" because you're sitting an inch or so higher than a similar sized frame in a sport-touring or road geometry.

I wouldn't have any remorse about getting the Randonee. Especially at the 20% discount and getting to use your dividend on it.

London commuter

In defence of CX commuter bikes, I like being a little higher in traffic. Maybe it is psychological or just personal preference but I think seeing a little further over cars when I sit up can't do any harm. It might make me a tiny bit more visible too.

I'm happy to be told being an inch higher won't make any difference but when I'm on my racing bike in the city (very occasional) I always feel that my view is more obscured by traffic.

cycle16v

I was in this same spot a couple of years ago. Touring or Cross cycle. I leaned more towards cross cycle bikes and only had a few choices but I decided on my Specialized Tricross Sport and I cannot be more pleased with it. The stock 700x32 tires work great and I feel really confident riding this bike with the wider tires.

Not that I have anything against REI because I love the store but I just wouldn't buy my bike from there since they have such a low inventory and selection that no coupon would make up the difference. I do however, buy my camping gear/clothing from REI. Great stuff and love the lifetime warranties on what I buy there.

CliftonGK1

I won't argue with you there. I think that the difference in BB height is a world of difference. the saddle on my 62cm CX bike sits higher than the saddle on my 64cm sport-touring bike, although both have the same saddle rail to crank bolt measurement. (same saddle on both bikes, too.)

mikeybikes

Why not both?

sudo bike

I have a '95 Randonee. Loves it. I'm running 35's on there now. I'd second the suggestion to bump up to 35's if you intend to do gravel road riding - 32's would be a little uncomfortable, I think. I'd stick with the Randonee, however... notoriously well-liked bikes.

Grim

I'm liking the Buzz. I have come to realize that wet brakes SUCK! LOL. It is more sporty then the Randonee
I also like the Marin Lombardo. Lower tier components but

That said the Randonee is good bang for the buck. Did you get the 2010 9speed or the older model with the $799 price tag?

I know a guy that bought a Randonee threw it into a rental car a week or two after he bought it drove to Key west and rode it to Alaska the summer of 07. He Blew the back wheel out but felt that could have been avoided by stopping at 100-200 miles and having the wheel trued.
https://keytoanchorage.com/

njkayaker

This isn't due to the BB. The racing bike is (presumably) set up so that your torso is more horizontal. That is, this is more related to the handle bar position (relative to the seat) than the BB height.

Note that wider tires are taller too.

================

Surly

https://www.surlybikes.com/frames/cross_check_frame/

BB drop 2.6 cm.

https://surlybikes.com/frames/long_haul_trucker_frame/

BB drop 1.6 cm.

The BB is lower on the Cross Check.

The difference is 1 cm, or approximately less than half of the width of your thumb.

Specialized

https://www.specialized.com/us/en/bc/...nuItemId=12187

BB drop 71-67mm.

https://www.specialized.com/us/en/bc/...enuItemId=9257

BB drop 73-70mm.

https://www.specialized.com/us/en/bc/...enuItemId=9256

BB drop 71.5-67.5mm.

Here, we are talking about only 6 mm!

kludgefudge

you don't need a CX bike for a bit of gravel road. the randonnee sounds like a perfectly good bike for your needs. maybe a little bigger tires, IF you dont like the 32's on gravel. personally I don't feel too uncomfortable on 25c tires on decent hardpacked gravel as long as its not too potholey and technical.

clasher

I gotta throw my vote in with the touring bike... panniers can make grocery runs pretty easy. Two bikes are nice though... a touring bike and a cross bike make for a pretty flexible pair of bikes.

dobber

You might want to double check those numbers, NASA.


The CC is 2.6" or 66mm. And the LHT is 3.1" or 78mm fir the equivalent 700c variant.

electrik

Ever going to race cross?

Commodus

The Randonee sounds perfect to me. Steel, fat tires...what more could you want?

A CX bike would probably be fine, though it wouldn't be my first choice. I think a tourer is a bit silly for a commute myself, unless said commute is 100+kms long and requires 15+kgs of gear.

ItsJustMe

Given my route, I've been thinking about the Novara Safari, if I can fit on the 17". I've been riding 700c wheels for 5 years now, but given the conditions of the road I ride on, I'm starting to think that 26" would be a better solution. If nothing else, I'd like the option of being able to go to wider tires in the winter, like studded 45s or so.

waynesworld

I really like the looks of that Randonee, personally. I think you made a great choice.