Cycling and bicycle discussion forums. 
   Click here to join our community Log in to access your Control Panel  


Go Back   > >

Recreational Cyclocross and Gravelbiking This has to be the most physically intense sport ever invented. It's high speed bicycle racing on a short off road course or riding the off pavement rides on gravel like :The Dirty Kanza". We also have a dedicated Racing forum for the Cyclocross Hard Core Racers.

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 05-09-07, 08:58 PM   #1
B RAD
Newbie
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Portland, Oregon
Bikes:
Posts: 3
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Salsa - Chili Con Crosso vs. Las Cruces

Looking to build my first CX Bike. I transistioned from Mnt Biking then to Road riding and now CX. Does anybody know the difference between Salsa'S - Chili Con Crosso vs. Las Cruces? Thanks for your help. Looking forward to getting one built...

Cheers
B RAD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-07, 02:25 PM   #2
fogrider
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: fogtown...san francisco
Bikes: Ron Cooper, Time VXSR, rock lobster, rock lobster, serotta, ritchey, kestrel, paramount
Posts: 2,276
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
this is the first I've seen the Chili Con Crosso...I've seen the Las Cruces at the races, but I've not ridden it. it looks like the difference is the Chili is a semi sloping toptube (with flat spot for shouldering the bike) and it does not come with a fork. I had a salsa campeon and the weakness in the frame set was the fork...it was way over a pound at a time when many forks are in the 350 gram range. it seems that the Chili is what they call their dedicated cross machine, where the Las Cruses is more of an all rounder.
fogrider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-07, 09:24 AM   #3
arcticbiker
1coolrider
 
arcticbiker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Bikes:
Posts: 475
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I'm building a Chili now. One difference is that the Los Cruces has disc mounts in the rear, the Chili doesn't. I decided to stick w/ the cantis and go with the Chili. I have the frame and it's very nice. Good craftsmenship & excellent paint job. I'm still gathering all my other components. I ended up buying the Ritchey WCS Carbon Cross fork. Still looking for wheels.

Good luck with your decision.
arcticbiker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-07, 01:17 PM   #4
gobes
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Bikes:
Posts: 228
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I think that another difference is the rear dropout spacing. The las cruces is 135 so you need an mtb hub. Although I know a couple of guys with that bike that just clamp it down on a 130.

I believe that the chili spacing is 130, but you might want to double check.
gobes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-07, 02:49 PM   #5
damocles1
The mods changed this...
 
damocles1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Bikes:
Posts: 2,346
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I use a 130 wheel in my Las Cruces...no issues...

The spacing IS 135, but you can just tighten the skewer...
damocles1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-07, 02:57 PM   #6
bac
Senior Member
 
bac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Pennsylvania
Bikes: Too many to list!
Posts: 7,481
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by B RAD
Looking to build my first CX Bike. I transistioned from Mnt Biking then to Road riding and now CX. Does anybody know the difference between Salsa'S - Chili Con Crosso vs. Las Cruces? Thanks for your help. Looking forward to getting one built...

Cheers
Sorry, I cannot help you with the differences, but I do own a Las Cruces. It's a solid steed, and perhaps my favorite bike. Good luck with your choice - I don't know that you can go wrong with either.


.... Brad
bac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-07, 10:30 PM   #7
nep
Just Plain
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Northern California
Bikes:
Posts: 45
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
The Chile has more tube shaping on the top tube and the stays for easy shouldering and a plush ride. It has 130mm rear spacing and a sloping TT with no disc mounts or fork (get an ouzo pro!). Those are the differences... besides the color and name (las cruces is soo much better!). If you want a Las Cruces, get one soon cause they're discontinued! Enjoy which ever one you pick!
nep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-07, 08:03 AM   #8
B RAD
Newbie
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Portland, Oregon
Bikes:
Posts: 3
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
What size did you get in the Chili? I am 5'10" short torso/long legs and currently ride a short Look with a 54.5 TT(hor). I been told I should ride the 51 (local shop thought), 49(I thought) or 47(Salsa thought). Any insight would be great!!!
B RAD is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:10 AM.