dellwilson

I'm considering building a bike for long rides and light touring. I'm looking at CX frames and have currently narrowed my list to the Salsa Casseroll and Soma Double Cross. In my comparison between the 2011 Casseroll frameset and the 2010 Double Cross frame and recommended fork, they have similar features. In order to make a decision between the two, I'm wondering if the geometry suggests any important differences...

Salsa Casseroll

Seat Tube Length: 555mm
Top Tube Effective Length: 545mm
Head Tube Angle: 72deg
Seat Tube Angle: 74deg
BB Drop: 75mm
Chainstay Length: 425mm
Heat Tube Length: 150mm
Fork Length: 395mm
Fork Offset: 50mm
Wheel Base: 1013.9mm
Stack: 586.3mm
Reach: 376.9mm
Stand Over: 783.0mm

Soma Double Cross

Top Tube Length: 560mm
Top Tube Effective Length: 567mm
Head Tube Angle: 72deg
Seat Tube Angle: 73deg
BB Drop: 66mm
Chainstay Length: 425mm
Heat Tube Length: 120mm
Fork Length: 350mm
Fork Offset: 44mm
Wheel Base: 1026mm
Stand Over: 792.5mm

To my untrained eyes, the differences don't seem significant; except for ~20mm on the headset and reach, which can be compensated with spacers and stem selection. Is there anything someone more experienced can see that is significant?

safariofthemind

Why are you building up from a frame and not taking a stock bike and modifying it to suit (other than to be able to have a bike that's different from the million LHTs out there)? :scratchinghead:

Bacciagalupe

There isn't an exact comparison between the two. The cross bike will have a higher BB, which will throw off some of the other specs.

That said, chainstay length is the same, wheelbase is the same, so I'd guess the bikes will handle very similarly. IIRC both these bikes will have clearance for wider tires and fenders. The DoubleCross will have a tiny advantage on bad surfaces due to the higher BB.

I think you'd be fine either way.

dellwilson

Partly as a learning experience and partly to have a bike I built from the frame up. I began this year vowing to learn to do my own wrenching. Except for one broken spoke, I accomplished that. I refurbished an old MTB during the summer to send with my son to college. This is just the next step.

safariofthemind

Gotcha.

I can definitely see the value in learning to wrench, especially when you are on the road. You'll know your machine better than most people do theirs. The downside is that the OEMs get a sweet deal on the components, which means it's really hard to get a similarly spec'd machine from the frame up for nearly the same money. Of course, you can start with a donor bike and shop the usual suspects for used parts. Did you catch the recent thread on a Nashbar frame build up? Came out pretty nice. Good luck.

Garthr

I see a potentially big difference, the seat tube angle. While I think they are both too steep, a 74 is really steep. I wouldn't even ride a pure racing bike with a 74 deg. STA, but that's me. If you've ridden on a bike before with that STA, fine, but if not, you may not be able to get the seat back far enough. You gotta know know what works for you.

Too many manufacturer's are stuck in steep STA's . Still ...... after all these years.

Bacciagalupe

Uh.... 74º is very common and is not particularly aggressive.

700c bikes that use 74º include the Surly Cross Check, some of the Trek 520's, Specialized Roubaix, Surly Pacer, Cannondale Synapse, Scott CR1.

A truly steep angle would be something like a time trial bike (78º).

Plus, you're comparing a road bike to a cross bike, and the cross will have a higher BB, which will require a slightly different ST angle in order to put the saddle in the same spot relative to the crank, yes? As such I'm not sure if a direct comparison of that one spec can work.

safariofthemind

Very interesting Bacciagalupe. I always wondered about that.

Check out this article on fit and angles. I am no ergonomics expert, but it seems the rider position and angles depend on more than the seat angle...
https://www.slowtwitch.com/mainheadin...r/bikefit.html

joel2old

I did what you are trying to do with a soma double cross. It is a bike that will do anything by changing the rubber. It has mounts for fenders and front and back racks. I can get on it after riding my race bikes and have no problem with comfort. I use it most as a tourer and have put thousands of miles on it with no issues. I did go down one size on frame from my road rides. Go for it!

dellwilson

The STA on my road bike is 73.5 deg. In fact, the only significant differences between these two bikes and my road bike are chainstay length and wheelbase. (Assuming ~2 cm is significant.) However, I have a 3.5 inch drop from my seat to my bar and I will definitely configure the bars higher on this bike.

Thanks for the responses everyone.

AsanaCycles

generally speaking, the steeper the seat tube angle, the more "on top" of the BB you'll be riding, which in turn, allows you to transition better from seated to standing, when climbing. TT bikes/ Tri bikes, etc... are a bit of a different story in that getting on top of the BB, allows you to better spin. (has to do with positioning, etc..)

AsanaCycles

right from the get go...
https://www.somafab.com/doublecross_one.html
vs
https://salsacycles.com/bikes/casseroll/

and/or
when you look at the opening page for Soma's Double Cross
https://www.somafab.com/frames.html

you'll notice that in both descriptives for Soma's Double Cross that they state both frames will accept MTN or Road hubs.

that is a reference to the rear hub spacing: which is... road at 130mm MTB at 135mm

so my gut reaction is that the reality is the frame is probably spaced at about 132mm
while this may or may not be a big deal.
looking at the chart: https://www.somafab.com/geometry03.html it states the rear dropout to be 132.5mm (which is how this frame accommodates road or MTB hubs)


as the Casseroll is clearly stated to have a 130mm rear drop out...

it really depends on what wheelset you'd like to use

which really starts to pin point the wheels...

the Soma uses a pinch clamp binder for the seatpost that is brazed to the frame
the Salsa uses a seatpost binder, collar that is separate from the frame.

its a minor detail, but if for some reason you have an issue, i.e. it breaks! at least on the Salsa you can simply stop at a bike shop and buy a new seatpost collar and be on your way.
whereas, the Soma... well... you'll be needing to have that welded.

top tube length: The Casseroll is shorter than the Double Cross
which means that for a given "fit"... reach to the bar...
the Salsa will have a longer stem
vs
the Soma a shorter stem

what this translates to... is steering responsiveness...
generally speaking... simply in terms of the length of a lever...
the longer a stem... the slower the response
the shorter a stem... the quicker the response

when you look at the fork specs:

salsa fork offset at 50mm
Soma fork offset at 44mm

the salsa places the axle more forward
the Soma closer by 6mm

which makes the steering feel more "responsive"

so you can see that literally these are two different bikes.
one a CX bike the other more of a mix between road bike/touring bike... "non-competitive road riding and commuting to ultralight credit card touring and randoneur rides." <---straight from the Salsa website.

in light of what a bike comes to... depending on your area... I'd think about resale...

a CX bike is apt to resale faster than a Rando bike...

BengeBoy 

I am not nearly as expert as some people, but the numbers that I looked at quickly were:

- Chainstay (is it long enough for my big feet) -- just a little shorter than I like for panniers (17 inches is my rule of thumb, 17.5 is better). But I'd pass both bikes.
- Casserroll has shorter top tube so I can sit more upright (1 point for Casserroll)
- Casserroll has longer head tube so I can get the bars up w/out a ton of spacers (1 point for Soma).

More importantly, I love the color of the new Casserroll, so I would rationalize any deficiencies in the frame geometry and get the Casserroll.

AsanaCycles

Casseroll can accommodate a triple crankset...

I'm not sure if the Double Cross is going to like a triple...

however...
the DC can take MTB wheels... (think 29er)
and with all the new SRAM MTB groupos being offered up at 2x10...

on that note:
I'd pick the Double Cross, use a set of MAVIC SpeedCitys, and SRAM Apex groupo with Avid disc brakes (road caliper), matched up to a gear combo of 50/34 x 32/11t

as to handlebars... I'd think about a set of titec J-bars...

as to bags.... I'd think about frame bags, in the BikePacking technique

NoReg

74 degrees would actually make it iffy getting my Brooks in the right position. Brooks doesn't have a large adjustment range, and while a degree at my frame size is only about 1/4" 73 is already tight, and 72 my preferred position.

I don't know what others have found, but I haven't found spec sheets all that accurate in the past. There seem to be numbers people are looking for, and those numbers get standardized across frames and are not what the bike actually measures. You know, you look at a list, and find the angles are the same between different sizes, the stays are the same length, and the wheelbases are the same, but the top tube lengths are different.

AsanaCycles

if you look at forks:

the Salsa fork for the Casseroll is not as easy to replace as the DC

and/or

the choices to change to something different aren't as widely available

the Casseroll uses a 50mm offset (rake), with an axle to crown of 383mm

the DC uses a more standard CX fork which is: 44mm (rake), and 395mm axle to crown

dellwilson

I've not gotten far enough into this to choose specific brand/model of wheels, but I'm definitely thinking road wheels and probably 28c width.

AsanaCycles

when I think of building bikes, not only do I think about what the bike is going to be like, as in its ride characteristics; but I also take into consideration things like what is available, what things cost, what the resale chances are, etc...

its seems to me that the Salsa Casseroll compared to the Soma DC, is... dare I say... more unique. In that I mean... things like perhaps how "popular" each one is.
I know around here, CX bikes are very popular, not only for of course racing CX, but also Fixie "kids" like them too...

unless of course, you really like the Casseroll (maybe its the color, or something) then thats that.

the thing with bikes, is that the only way you are going to know what you like, is only by actually going thru the reiterations of a million little variables.
which then comes to... one day... you may seek out a custom bike...

safariofthemind

People often get bikes because of their trajectory and history in cycling. Witness the legion of people who love to tour on Salsa Vaya's vs LHT's. Different philosophies, different aesthetics, different on vs off road profiles. That's a good thing.

cyclist2000

I do my own build ups for a couple of reasons.

1) the bike has the components that I want and setup for my type of riding.

2) the cost could be similar as a complete bike if you know which components and frame that you want and shop carefully.

I like the idea of getting the bike setup the way that I want it with the brand of components that I like.

I like building my own wheels but I can get wheels built at some of the online shops for a similar price as what I could build one for, so the labor is free. And I am sure they have built more than the couple of dozen or so that I have built and should be better at it.

AsanaCycles

slightly off topic...
but this Kelley CX has popped up on CL local to Monterey
https://monterey.craigslist.org/bik/2031969864.html

the axle to crown length is 393mm