Is there a more appropriate bike for my needs than the CAADX?
#26
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 147
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 56 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 14 Times
in
12 Posts
The E5 Diverges do, yes. The carbon models come with 38s. The tire capacity on the E5 models is substantially lower. I have heard (but have not confirmed personally) that the 38s that come on the carbon models would only just barely fit, if at all, on an E5. Yet another interesting design decision Specialized made with this bike.
#27
Full Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 266
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 128 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
The E5 Diverges do, yes. The carbon models come with 38s. The tire capacity on the E5 models is substantially lower. I have heard (but have not confirmed personally) that the 38s that come on the carbon models would only just barely fit, if at all, on an E5. Yet another interesting design decision Specialized made with this bike.
#29
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 147
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 56 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 14 Times
in
12 Posts
GK slicks or SKs? The carbon model tire I mentioned are Specialized Trigger Sports, which are much knobbier than GK slicks and might wipe away some or all of that 5mm you mentioned. I had asked the salesman at the Specialized-heavy shop where I test rode both an E5 and a carbon model if the carbon tires would fit on an E5 and his response was, "ehhhhhhh." I translated that in my head to "it would be damn close." I suspect most 38s would indeed fit, but it is still odd that there would be such a big difference between models within what is supposed to be the same series of bikes.
#31
Full Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 266
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 128 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
GK slicks or SKs? The carbon model tire I mentioned are Specialized Trigger Sports, which are much knobbier than GK slicks and might wipe away some or all of that 5mm you mentioned. I had asked the salesman at the Specialized-heavy shop where I test rode both an E5 and a carbon model if the carbon tires would fit on an E5 and his response was, "ehhhhhhh." I translated that in my head to "it would be damn close." I suspect most 38s would indeed fit, but it is still odd that there would be such a big difference between models within what is supposed to be the same series of bikes.
The E5 Comp page on Specialized.com said they listened to feedback and made the "most requested change" and the bike now takes 42mm tires, but I don't know if this is the same language they used last year (when it only applied to the carbon models).
#32
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Southern Appalachians
Posts: 453
Bikes: A hauler, a commuter, and a steamroller.
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
Chas58's point was that a "real" rider can manage a twitchy bike. Whatever.
I don't see why that's any more awe inspiring than learning how not to pedal-strike with a lower BB. Particularly for a style of riding where tight turns with a surface firm enough to hammer through the turn are rare.
And, as the OP is looking for (his words) a "real" gravel bike, I don't think pushing him to a high BB is a great idea. Low bb, long wheelbase, slack steering. Unless his gravel is of the washed out Appalachian doubletrack variety, then he should get a hardtail with a 22/36 double.
I don't see why that's any more awe inspiring than learning how not to pedal-strike with a lower BB. Particularly for a style of riding where tight turns with a surface firm enough to hammer through the turn are rare.
And, as the OP is looking for (his words) a "real" gravel bike, I don't think pushing him to a high BB is a great idea. Low bb, long wheelbase, slack steering. Unless his gravel is of the washed out Appalachian doubletrack variety, then he should get a hardtail with a 22/36 double.
#33
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Michigan
Posts: 4,863
Bikes: too many of all kinds
Mentioned: 35 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1147 Post(s)
Liked 415 Times
in
335 Posts
Chas58's point was that a "real" rider can manage a twitchy bike. Whatever.
And, as the OP is looking for (his words) a "real" gravel bike, I don't think pushing him to a high BB is a great idea. Low bb, long wheelbase, slack steering. Unless his gravel is of the washed out Appalachian doubletrack variety, then he should get a hardtail with a 22/36 double.
And, as the OP is looking for (his words) a "real" gravel bike, I don't think pushing him to a high BB is a great idea. Low bb, long wheelbase, slack steering. Unless his gravel is of the washed out Appalachian doubletrack variety, then he should get a hardtail with a 22/36 double.
Or do you think that a low BB makes a bike twitchy?
OP needs a multi purpose bike, including a commuter. I don't like commuting with a low BB. He may or may not - its just something for him to think about.
#34
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Michigan
Posts: 4,863
Bikes: too many of all kinds
Mentioned: 35 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1147 Post(s)
Liked 415 Times
in
335 Posts
And “real” riders can be fast on a bike with a low bb on paved surfaces.
Is the eye roll coming through? I hope so.
Is the eye roll coming through? I hope so.
I know, you and I ride different. I mention my perspective to give the OP something to think about, not to make you wrong.
Personally I like to accelerate through turns. I can't do that with a low bottom bracket.
I have been thrown off the road at 30mph because I hit a pedal on a bike with a BB lower than I expected. That puckered my sphincter!
Never had a problem with a 50mm drop on my bike. I don't have a problem with a 70mm drop on my bike. But personally 75 or 80mm drop is too low for me. The BB drop is rather a subtle difference, but it does make fast loose downhills a little easier - although wheelbase plays a bigger role in my experience. Nothing subtle about pedal strike, although sure - you can wait until you exit the turn to pedal. On my rides, I can't really afford to open up that kind of gap. That and bikes with low BB just feel a little sluggish to me.
Your needs are different. The OP can take all of this into consideration and decides what fits his style...
#35
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Southern Appalachians
Posts: 453
Bikes: A hauler, a commuter, and a steamroller.
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
A high BB can make a bike less stable on a steep gravel descent. I'd call that twitchy.
Shorter chainstays and less-slack steering can have similar effects. Often, cyclocross bikes have all three - short chainstays, high BB, and aggressive steering. This is not ideal for gravel riding.
And you said:
Which is a stupid argument, because it has no end. For example: Real riders only need one wheel to ride gravel.
Go ahead, ride a cyclocross bike on gravel. That's a compromise rather than a bike best suited to the task, and OP said:
So a bike with a low BB, slack head angle, and longish wheelbase that also has fender/rack bosses is what fits their need. Not a high-BB cross bike. Also, not a unicycle.
Shorter chainstays and less-slack steering can have similar effects. Often, cyclocross bikes have all three - short chainstays, high BB, and aggressive steering. This is not ideal for gravel riding.
And you said:
Which is a stupid argument, because it has no end. For example: Real riders only need one wheel to ride gravel.
Go ahead, ride a cyclocross bike on gravel. That's a compromise rather than a bike best suited to the task, and OP said:
So a bike with a low BB, slack head angle, and longish wheelbase that also has fender/rack bosses is what fits their need. Not a high-BB cross bike. Also, not a unicycle.
#36
Full Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 266
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 128 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
I did not only toe-strike on the Diverge pedaling around turns. It happened all the time (with clips and straps). Rocks on the trail, somewhat bumpy but not bad trails (like the C&O towpath), even sometimes climbing standing on paved roads.
I can't really imagine there would be any significant difference in stability by being less than 1 inch higher up, but I certainly could be wrong, others of you are far more experienced than I am.
BTW my Raleigh RXM 54cm has a longer wheelbase than a Diverge 54cm and only 7mm shorter than my Diverge 56cm. And only a 4mm difference in chainstays, I would have trouble believing 4mm would make a noticeable difference in handling or stability.
I can't really imagine there would be any significant difference in stability by being less than 1 inch higher up, but I certainly could be wrong, others of you are far more experienced than I am.
BTW my Raleigh RXM 54cm has a longer wheelbase than a Diverge 54cm and only 7mm shorter than my Diverge 56cm. And only a 4mm difference in chainstays, I would have trouble believing 4mm would make a noticeable difference in handling or stability.
#37
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Michigan
Posts: 4,863
Bikes: too many of all kinds
Mentioned: 35 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1147 Post(s)
Liked 415 Times
in
335 Posts
curt - I agree - the diverge is a bit low for my tastes.
I have bikes with different height BB (50-80mm). BB doesn’t make the bike twitchy in my experience.
From a frame design perspective, trail makes a bike twitchy. That is mostly adjusted by head tube angle. BB does not affect trail. When it comes to drifting though a turn, wheelbase makes a difference in stability.
My bike with the 50mm BB drop has high trail. It’s not twitchy. My bike with the 80mm bottom bracket drop is twitchy (and has a low trail). That is the opposite of what porky stated.
Chill Porky. Of course your reference is not a serious argument. That is why it has the LOL! I guess you can argue with sarcasm if you want..
I have bikes with different height BB (50-80mm). BB doesn’t make the bike twitchy in my experience.
From a frame design perspective, trail makes a bike twitchy. That is mostly adjusted by head tube angle. BB does not affect trail. When it comes to drifting though a turn, wheelbase makes a difference in stability.
My bike with the 50mm BB drop has high trail. It’s not twitchy. My bike with the 80mm bottom bracket drop is twitchy (and has a low trail). That is the opposite of what porky stated.
Chill Porky. Of course your reference is not a serious argument. That is why it has the LOL! I guess you can argue with sarcasm if you want..
#39
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 2,857
Bikes: Road bike, Hybrid, Gravel, Drop bar SS, hard tail MTB
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1218 Post(s)
Liked 298 Times
in
214 Posts
Is there a more appropriate bike for my needs than the CAADX?
NOnow go buy the caadx, you know, to shut them up.
#40
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,764
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1975 Post(s)
Liked 232 Times
in
173 Posts
A high BB can make a bike less stable on a steep gravel descent. I'd call that twitchy.
Shorter chainstays and less-slack steering can have similar effects. Often, cyclocross bikes have all three - short chainstays, high BB, and aggressive steering. This is not ideal for gravel riding.
And you said:
Which is a stupid argument, because it has no end. For example: Real riders only need one wheel to ride gravel.
Go ahead, ride a cyclocross bike on gravel. That's a compromise rather than a bike best suited to the task, and OP said:
So a bike with a low BB, slack head angle, and longish wheelbase that also has fender/rack bosses is what fits their need. Not a high-BB cross bike. Also, not a unicycle.
Shorter chainstays and less-slack steering can have similar effects. Often, cyclocross bikes have all three - short chainstays, high BB, and aggressive steering. This is not ideal for gravel riding.
And you said:
Which is a stupid argument, because it has no end. For example: Real riders only need one wheel to ride gravel.
Go ahead, ride a cyclocross bike on gravel. That's a compromise rather than a bike best suited to the task, and OP said:
So a bike with a low BB, slack head angle, and longish wheelbase that also has fender/rack bosses is what fits their need. Not a high-BB cross bike. Also, not a unicycle.
#41
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Stillwater, OK
Posts: 8,128
Mentioned: 33 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1871 Post(s)
Liked 688 Times
in
466 Posts
edit: (Don't take that as agreeing to the previous statement.)
__________________
2014 Cannondale SuperSix EVO 2
2019 Salsa Warbird
2014 Cannondale SuperSix EVO 2
2019 Salsa Warbird
#44
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,764
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1975 Post(s)
Liked 232 Times
in
173 Posts
Yea but the back and forth here was mostly about the BB drop, which to me only one aspect. The new Super X actually has a steeper HT angle and less trail so would be more twitchy
#45
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Southern Appalachians
Posts: 453
Bikes: A hauler, a commuter, and a steamroller.
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
Ted won DK overall on a slate not too long ago, is that also the perfect gravel bike?
To the OP: The CAADX has a decent head angle, but short chainstays and a medium height BB - it might be less stable at speed on loose gravel than you would like, and there are plenty of other bikes that offer similar features with a slacker overall geometry. You just don't need twitchy handling on a gravel bike - unless you are also expecting that bike to be good for racing CX or crits, but then it is a compromise bike.
I'd suggest looking at something like the Norco Search, Jamis Renegade, RLT 9, or Raleigh Tamland.
#48
Full Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 266
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 128 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
I guess I point my toes down a lot in that situation.
By the way, from the OP itself, he doesn't really make it super clear what he means by needing "a real gravel bike" to ride with his wife, but from what he says it kind of sounds like he just means bigger tires.
By the way, from the OP itself, he doesn't really make it super clear what he means by needing "a real gravel bike" to ride with his wife, but from what he says it kind of sounds like he just means bigger tires.
#49
your god hates me
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 4,571
Bikes: 2016 Richard Sachs, 2010 Carl Strong, 2006 Cannondale Synapse
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1220 Post(s)
Liked 1,224 Times
in
681 Posts
Just so I'm clear on terminology: Does "slacker" mean less steep HTA & longer wheelbase? Thanks.
#50
your god hates me
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 4,571
Bikes: 2016 Richard Sachs, 2010 Carl Strong, 2006 Cannondale Synapse
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1220 Post(s)
Liked 1,224 Times
in
681 Posts
But it doesn't have the required clearance.
So as long as I have to buy another bike I might as well also get something with disc brakes, and a non-ferrous frame, and perhaps some slightly more forgiving gear ratios, and mounts for full-coverage fenders, and so here I am talking to the "Cyclocross and Gravelbiking (Recreational)" crew.
btw, a couple nights ago I did some side-by-side geometry comparisons of two of my current road bikes with three of the off-road bikes I'm considering: The CAADX, the Trek Checkpoint ALR 4, and the Giant Anyroad Advanced 1. In addition to being the least expensive of those three, the CAADX had the closest geometry to the bikes I already own. And, arguably, the highest quality components. The fact that my wife owns a 2017 CAADX (which I presume means I could easily swap wheels with her) is starting to make me feel like the universe is telling me to just buy the CAADX.