I like the colour, actually. Celeste kind of grows on you... and it is, I am told, the colour of the universe.

Rager: A cross bike has some specialist adaptations to the standard road bike... It has a higher bottom bracket, which gives more clearance over trail obstacles; more tire clearance and cantilever brakes, that allow for wider, knobby tires [usually something like 28c-35c]; lower gearing, for grinding through the dirt, usually a 48-38 chainring combination up front rather than the usual roadie 53-39; a slightly compact frame -- vertically to allow for easier dismounts and portage, horizontally to give a slightly more upright position in the drops; usually slightly wider handlebars with a squarer top bend...

None of this means that you couldn't swap out the tires to 25c or 23c tires and use it as a road bike, though. Most 'cross bikes make perfectly capable road bikes, and I've used mine for 80-100 km road rides in bad weather. The geometry doesn't exactly favour racing -- a bit too upright, with the high BB -- but that dosn't mean anything.

Rich:Actually, I think it's quite nicely specced for 'cross. The CF fork is a nice touch and, though I like more of a solid block, the MTB cassette is a nice touch for climbing -- the 38/32 is almost 1:1! I think it's also a very nice all-arounder. In fact, I'm beginning to think that cyclocross bikes may be the perfect all-around design. Sure, there might be some compromises -- not as agressive as a full-on roadie, and not exactly set up for freeriding -- but for everything else, the geometry and spec [of most mid-range 'cross bikes, not just this one] is just right.

The irony is that the bicycle industry has been experimenting with hybrids and cruisers and flat-bar road bikes and whatever for 15 years, and yet here's an ideal, all-around design that's been around for more than half a century. An agressive manufacturer could spec a good quality, sub-22 lb aluminum 'cross bike and sell it as an all-around road bike for 450. That could revolutionize the bike biz.