1 week and seven miles old. Desperately needs the new saddle to come in, new bars, new crank rings, new wheels that aren't boat anchors, and to be covered in mud. This bicycle will experience glory on the weekly-winter CX Sunday course and a few gravel grinds throughout the year.
Here's my cross bike. At the time, I only use it for commuting to work.
2004 Redline Conquest Pro 60cm
Full Shimano 105 Group except the Ultegra Crank
Mavic Crossride 29er Wheels
Continental Cyclo X-King Tires 700 x 35
Avid BB5 R brakes
Last edited by ATXRider; 07-09-14 at 12:07 PM.
Just picked this up yesterday.
2014 Fuji Cross 1.3
Rides great. Really stable on loose terrain and fast. Have a gravel grinder race in 2 days and will really put it to the test.
Picked this up a couple weeks ago to act as a carrot to get me back to riding after my broken leg heals.
Just bought a Moots layback seatpost. They sure are proud of these titanium bits and pieces...
Demented internet tail wagging imbicile.
Giant TCR Advanced 0 w/ISP
Airborne Valkarie Ti
Gilles Bertrand Custom
KHS Flite 100
KHS Solo One
Miyata 750 Fixed conversion
Crux sport 105
Velocity Major Toms laced 3x with double butted spokes to 105 hubs 32h each.
Specialized Terra Tubs.
Sir Mark, Knight of Sufferlandria
please answer: your height? iseam?
So I decided to buy a bike like that. I wonder about the size of it (I'm 5'5 ", iseam 29.5" without shoes) and I'm just the mtb size 16.
I refer to the calculation of the size of the bike I have only resulted in: top tube 55; stem 9; seat tube c-c 49 (or 53.5 top tube, stem 9; seat tube cc 49) so I had to cross Fantom size 52.
I'm not sure what I should choose size: 49 or 52 I want to consult you.
thank you very much.
(sorry, my english is not good)
Yes, it's a 52cm
Im 5'8" with a 30" inseam without shoes (short legs I guess)
When over the hoods or in the drops I feel a bit more stretched out then when on my Moto Ti road bike, which is strange because the 51 Ti road bike has a 540mm top tube where the Cross claims to have a 535mm. Ill measure the cross when I get home for you.
Unless you have long arms or like to ride in an aggressive position, I would lean towards the 49 if I were you.
I understand that my calculations put the standard parameters for pro.
My problem is I do not like the top tube slopes down too much -> looks bad.
I do not race, so I want comfortable position on the bike, I use it to go around the city, traveling in a few days.
Should I be overcome by replacing one short stems (6cm compared with existing 9cm), seat post offset = 0 (I like Thomson elite), Ritchey seat post offset = 2.5 cm. Reduced 5,5cm -> ok ???? Or do you still keep your comments ??
intends to upgrade after I had this bike: Thomson seat post, Brooks saddles and stems perhaps more
Not sure what to say about the top tube angle, it has less of an angle than a CAADx, which I think has a pretty aggressive stance to begin with. I wouldnt consider either frames compact.
The stem you can shorten, but typically if your going under 80mm most people will say the bike is too big for you. As for the seat post, switching to a zero setback post isn't the best solution to shorten a bike, it puts your body too far forward in relation to the bottom bracket, and you would have to put the seat back further on the rails for a true correct fit.
All I can say is buy it and try it. If it fits keep it, if not, send it back for the smaller size. You will just be out shipping.
Back to photos...
1999 Waterford RSE-11, 1995 Waterford 1200, 1989 Specialized Rockhopper Comp
1989 Raleigh Technium, 1989 Schwinn Traveler, 1986 Specialized Rockhopper
1984 Specialized Stumpjumper, 1986 Specialized Stumpjumper and just way too many projects to list.