Advertise on Bikeforums.net



User Tag List

Results 1 to 6 of 6
  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    81
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Thoughts on Nashbar CX Aluminum frame

    Has anyone built up a bike using this frame - and what are your experiences with racing it - if any?

    It's about time to upgrade my trusted 2008 Van Dessel Hole Shot - but here's the deal:

    Last year I literally replaced every major component on the bike (due to fatigue and to increase performance). So, other than the frame, I literally have a new bike.

    The VD has been rocked for 6 years and I'm not a small rider (190lbs) and is starting to make some weird creaking noises. Anyway - rather than drop $2K on a decent bike, I am strongly considering just getting a frame to last me a few more years.

    The Nashbar aluminum CX seems like a great deal ($114 - less 20%). I would use mine for mostly touring and a few CX races per year. (I'm late 40's so I don't need to have a top of the line bike anymore for racing).

    The head angle on the Nashbar frame is only 70 degrees but the VD is 73 - all other geo's are pretty similar.

    LMK if you have any experience with it - much appreciated.

    Thanks.
    Last edited by ambro; 06-30-14 at 06:40 PM. Reason: spelling error

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    3,334
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    An alloy frame is great - be sure to mate it with a steel or a carbon fork to absorb road chatter. Carbon is lighter and stiffer.

  3. #3
    Senior Member grolby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    BOSTON BABY
    Posts
    6,693
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I recommend against this frame. First, as you've already noticed, it has a ridiculously slack headtube angle. Three degrees of difference doesn't sound like much, but it's huge. The geometry just isn't very good.

    Second, and much worse, there is a very real possibility that your crankset of choice won't fit. Crank and chainstay interference is a known problem with this frame, even with relatively short cranks. I had a set of 170s installed, they cleared the stays but literally only just - the clearance was something like 1-2 millimeters. That's not an exaggeration. When I sold the frame, there were scuffs on the stays from the ends of the cranks, which must have been making some slight contact as the cranks and frame flexed under pedaling loads.

    I think you should stay away. Just about any other bargain CX frame would be a safer bet.

  4. #4
    Have bike, will travel Barrettscv's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Windy City
    My Bikes
    A road bike for every purpose
    Posts
    8,801
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    2014 Trek DS.1: "Viaggiatore" A do-it-all bike that is waiting in Italy
    2012 Pedal Force CG2: "Secolo Bicicletta" the modern carbon fiber road bike
    2012 Pedal Force CX2: "Carbone CX" the carbon fiber CX bike
    2010 Origin 8 CX 700: "Servizio Grave" Monstercross/29er bike
    1997 Simoncini Special Cyclocross: "Little Simon" lugged Columbus steel CX bike
    1987 Serotta Nova Special X: "Azzurri" The retro Columbus SPX steel road bike

  5. #5
    coprolite fietsbob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    NW,Oregon Coast
    My Bikes
    7
    Posts
    38,892
    Mentioned
    20 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    adequate..

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    81
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Thank you very much for your insight. I'll definitely avoid this frame.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •