![]() |
I purchased a new bike for my first season racing cross. The reach feels a little short, especially when riding on the tops or out of the saddle. If this were a road bike, I would swap out the 100mm stem for a 120mm stem. But I'm concerned that might make really tight turns slower or more difficult. Thoughts? Do you run your cross bikes with a little less reach than your road bikes, or are they about the same?
|
Originally Posted by Issaquatch
(Post 17206131)
I purchased a new bike for my first season racing cross. The reach feels a little short, especially when riding on the tops or out of the saddle. If this were a road bike, I would swap out the 100mm stem for a 120mm stem. But I'm concerned that might make really tight turns slower or more difficult. Thoughts? Do you run your cross bikes with a little less reach than your road bikes, or are they about the same?
the cross position is more upright for a variety of reasons. sure, you might prefer the 120 stem vs the 100, but you won't know until you have more experience. if we know nothing else about you and you want a starting point, raise stack and reduce reach. FWIW, i run the same size cross frame & road frame (crux & tarmac). the crux has 17mm more stack and 11mm less reach than the comparably-sized tarmac. i run a 130 stem on the crux vs a 140 on the tarmac, and my crux has a few mm of spacers under the stem (stem is slammed on both but the crux has a cone spacer whereas on the tarmac i removed the cone spacer and just use a flat dust cap). effectively it's about +23mm stack and -21 reach. let us know how it goes for you. PNW should be a hotbed for CX. get a good mud tread! |
Originally Posted by tetonrider
(Post 17206644)
effectively it's about +23mm stack and -21 reach. |
Originally Posted by Ygduf
(Post 17207229)
all sounds like a big change until you realize you're levering your torso back at the shoulder, from the hip, 1.25 inches. Crack your elbows and you're back to the same place.
cross and mountain fits tend to put the rider in a bit more upright position for handling/reacting to rougher terrain--more stack/less reach should generally mean more relaxed upper body. getting lower/more aero isn't as necessary as often, but to your point one can just bend zee elbows to save a few grams of drag. |
Thanks. I did a longer ride yesterday and the reach was short enough that anything out of the saddle felt awkward. I'll split the difference between the current stack / reach and the setup on my road bike and will see how it goes. My first race is next Saturday. It should be wet, muddy and fun.
|
Spoke question.
I'm having a Powertap hub built into a carbon wheel I bought used. The original wheel has bladed spokes. The guy who's doing the work said I needed to use round or oval spokes for durability. Is there a meaningful difference in terms of drag with rear wheel spokes, or is this one of those "how many angels can dance on the head of a pin" questions? |
There's a whole lot of factors. Drag, weight, cost, strength, being affected by side winds, etc. I personally like Sapim CX-Ray spokes. They are very light, strong, aero, and the wheel isn't overly affected by side winds. They are also not cheap. It's really up to you what you want to spend.
|
wrt chainrings: any reason (other than some negligible weight different) to go with dura ace over ultegra? still on 10 speed.
|
wrt spokes, I am not sure what the builder is getting at wrt durability. a Sapim Laser (round) and CX-Ray (blade) are the same spoke, with the CX-Ray being flattened from a Laser. When you're talking about tension loads like you are with a spoke, the area of the spoke, which is the same for both, is your main concern.
|
Re: spokes, that was a misunderstanding on my part. I spoke with a couple of days ago, and he told me that bladed spokes require that the holes in the hub flange be slotted for them to fit through, and the holes on the PT hub are round. I've got Sapim Race spokes on the way.
|
Originally Posted by revchuck
(Post 17239577)
Re: spokes, that was a misunderstanding on my part. I spoke with a couple of days ago, and he told me that bladed spokes require that the holes in the hub flange be slotted for them to fit through, and the holes on the PT hub are round. I've got Sapim Race spokes on the way.
|
So I think I'm going to build up an older SystemSix to race next year, and to give me something to do over the winter. Plan now is to modify for internal electronic. I ride campy mechanical otherwise.
Original thought is to use 6870 so I can use my 11 speed wheels, however I really prefer campy ergonomics so not sure if its worth considering EPS v2. Have any of you set up, maintained, or raced EPS and what were your experiences? Drilling the charge port is not a major concern as I'll have to modify the frame either way, but if you had reliability problems or inconsistencies with performance then this would defeat the whole purpose of going electronic. |
Originally Posted by Issaquatch
(Post 17206131)
I purchased a new bike for my first season racing cross. The reach feels a little short, especially when riding on the tops or out of the saddle. If this were a road bike, I would swap out the 100mm stem for a 120mm stem. But I'm concerned that might make really tight turns slower or more difficult. Thoughts? Do you run your cross bikes with a little less reach than your road bikes, or are they about the same?
|
Anyone have experience with the Sanremo suits? We had or kit fittings today for next season and I got to try on the Castelli Sanremo 3.0. OMG that thing is amazing, at least wearing it for 30 seconds. At $220 bucks its not cheap and I'm thinking about just getting two of those and calling it a day. The basic kit is $80 less and more durable, but thicker, which plays in during the summer when most days are 100+
I doubt its 24 watts faster than the team kit (like they claim) but just by the fit it seems like it will save a few watts. |
Originally Posted by furiousferret
(Post 17256322)
Anyone have experience with the Sanremo suits? We had or kit fittings today for next season and I got to try on the Castelli Sanremo 3.0. OMG that thing is amazing, at least wearing it for 30 seconds. At $220 bucks its not cheap and I'm thinking about just getting two of those and calling it a day. The basic kit is $80 less and more durable, but thicker, which plays in during the summer when most days are 100+
I doubt its 24 watts faster than the team kit (like they claim) but just by the fit it seems like it will save a few watts. |
Originally Posted by furiousferret
(Post 17256322)
Anyone have experience with the Sanremo suits? We had or kit fittings today for next season and I got to try on the Castelli Sanremo 3.0. OMG that thing is amazing, at least wearing it for 30 seconds. At $220 bucks its not cheap and I'm thinking about just getting two of those and calling it a day. The basic kit is $80 less and more durable, but thicker, which plays in during the summer when most days are 100+
I doubt its 24 watts faster than the team kit (like they claim) but just by the fit it seems like it will save a few watts. |
Thanks guys, based off that it looks like I'm only going to go with one, and either an Aero Race or Team Kit. I hate using things just for racing, and my intention is using it in some of our hammerfests (I have a skinsuit already) and long road races when I need pockets, so at least once a week. I'll risk buying one and see how it goes
|
We changed to Castelli for 2015 and I tried one on. A bunch of my teammates are ordering them but I decided against it because it makes my butt look big.
|
Originally Posted by caloso
(Post 17257866)
We changed to Castelli for 2015 and I tried one on. A bunch of my teammates are ordering them but I decided against it because it makes my butt look big.
|
Okay so a crankarms tech question. As we all know I am a big dumb ole Crit rider. I have ridden on 172.5, recently been on 170mm. I am wondering based on my size (let's say 200 pounds) and power levels if going to a 175mm might allow me to leverage my weight and power to develop a better sprint/etc and spin the 54t front ring a little better.
|
My firsts thoughts are that:
- Crank length should be mostly dictated by leg length not weight or force development. - Generally you increase lever length to decrease the amount of force needed to create torque (e.g. a breaker bar). If you have massive force... |
Originally Posted by Enthalpic
(Post 17258383)
My firsts thoughts are that:
- Crank length should be mostly dictated by leg length not weight or force development. - Generally you increase lever length to decrease the amount of force needed to create torque (e.g. a breaker bar). If you have massive force... |
Originally Posted by rkwaki
(Post 17258284)
Okay so a crankarms tech question. As we all know I am a big dumb ole Crit rider. I have ridden on 172.5, recently been on 170mm. I am wondering based on my size (let's say 200 pounds) and power levels if going to a 175mm might allow me to leverage my weight and power to develop a better sprint/etc and spin the 54t front ring a little better.
I'm on 172.5's, too lazy to try anything else. |
Originally Posted by mattm
(Post 17258407)
My advice is just race! (and maybe train first)
I'm on 172.5's, too lazy to try anything else. |
Originally Posted by rkwaki
(Post 17258427)
We could run under the assumption that the big fella is in pretty good shape ;)
honestly you're talking 1.4% more leverage for a 4.4% longer pedal stroke. It ain't going to matter, is my educated guess. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:53 AM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.