View Single Post
Old 06-15-12 | 10:40 AM
  #38  
pacificcyclist
Senior Member
 
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 920
Likes: 1
From: Canada

Bikes: 2012 Masi Speciale CX : 2013 Ghost 29er EBS

Originally Posted by fuzz2050
Cyclocross bikes are only questionably road bikes; the typical cross race looks rather unlike most roads I've seen. Granted, the differences between a mid level cross bike and a mid level road (racing) bike are much smaller than between a cross bike and a mountain bike. Then again, even the category 'mountain bike' is meaning less and less, you have to specify cross country, all mountain, down hill, or whatever category. Of course, the differences between a beach cruiser and a single speed mountain bike really come down to tire tread, brake choice and geometry.

Honestly, nomenclature gets so messy that it's important to be precise. Road bikes aren't all road bikes, there are road bikes set up for quick short races like crits, road bikes set up for long distance endurance races, and road bikes made for hauling lots of gear long distances. They are all ridden on the road, and while one can be substituted for the others, it would be sub optimal.
Cyclocross bikes are racing bikes and they are designed that way. Incidentally, a properly fitted cyclocross bike gives you about 1cm shorter reach and a 1cm shorter seat tube against a standard road geometry. Guess what, my 51cm Masi Speciale CX is 1cm shorter reach and 1cm shorter on the seat tube against my 52 cm Trek 5000 carbon race bike yielding similar riding characteristics -- better acceleration than a touring bike, but not as good as a dedicated race bike and a more comfortable upright riding position. But how often people buy bikes and utilize a professional fitter to fit them properly?!? Pretty rare. I think most likely, it's a parking lot test ride but that gives absolutely no basis of the cyclocross bike characteristics.

Cyclocross has similar quick steering response like a racing road bike. Obviously, it's designed for racing so you need quick steering (similar toe overlap you find on racing road bikes). A dedicated well designed touring bike has a more benign steering response with no toe overlap. Why, because you just need the bike to keep straight by itself for hours with minimal feedback from the rider. That's difference #1. Difference #2 is that the longer chainstays found on cross bike is to accommodate mud clearance and fatter 30c to 35c cross tires. A typical racing road bike probably has shorter caliper brakes and has clearance up to 28c or maybe a 25c but most are sold with 23c. The confusion arises because people equate longer chainstays as touring capable. Not true, but this confusion extends to cross country mountain bikes where they too have long chainstays. But the chainstays aren't long enough to provide the load stability and the natural suspension like a touring bike. Why didn't they make the chainstays longer? Well, it's a racing bike so you need the ability to accelerate quick and short chainstays allow quick acceleration especially in cyclocross where there's a bit stop and go and portaging.

Top tube looks stiff because it's ovalized or squared. Well, they didn't make cross bikes with a flat bottom end top tube just so you can haul heavy loads. They are made flat so it's easier on your shoulders during the portage section of the course. But I often see bike shops telling B.S that those top tubes are made to resist twisting forces when loaded. Cable routing on the cyclocross bikes are usually on top. This shares similar characteristics to early generation cross country mountain bikes to prevent the cables from getting mud. Mud on cables is bad for shifting and braking.

Other than that, the geometry on the cross bike is more aggressive than a touring bike, but less than a dedicated racing bike. This has to do with the positioning of the rider and his or her C.G (Center of Gravity) in relation to the bottom bracket and has no relations with the K.O.P.S method of bike fitting -- it's just so happen that that fitting yields an almost identical relationship with a more professional custom fitting few people do. This relationship dictates the ability to leverage the bike's gears. Remember that there are 3 contact points on the bike to the rider. Handle bar, saddle and pedals. When the rider rides the bike, these contact points provide the ride with a series of levers and pivot points which is then used to leverage the gears to allow your bike to go faster. These are mechanical advantages. Same thing with a pry bar. A longer pry bar allows less perceived effort to open the nailed crate compared to a shorter pry bar. This is a mechanical advantage. But you wouldn't call a different lengths of pry bars, a "race" pry bar, "mountain style" pry bar, "Cross" pry bar or "touring" pry bar. That would be silly wouldn't it?

In the end, a properly fitted touring bike, cross bike and racing bike will allow the rider to ride at his or her maximum performance level with minimal muscular effort. The aerodynamic and mechanical advantage or frictional loss will then determine the overall cruising speed. The difference isn't much for mortal people like us except for racers because every seconds count towards their G.C, but there are tons of people who buy bikes who are being told by marketers otherwise.

Last edited by pacificcyclist; 06-15-12 at 11:00 AM.
pacificcyclist is offline  
Reply