loboseb

1st impression test ride of a CX bike

So, Im looking for a bit of a unicorn bike. That sounded so hipster..... Wish I could delete it.... Oh well....

Im looking for a fast, fun city riding, get on sidewalks, make quick nimble turns or take offs with bike that has strong pick up when pedaling off and a few strokes after. So I like to ride it like a boxster car. But Im not fan of aggressively low handle bars, in fact Im trying to make change from flat bar to a not so aggressive handle bar road bike + enough width to ride over street scracks, bumps. I live in Atlanta: hills, drivers not used to bikes, not a bike city, sometimes crappy broken roads, potholes, gotta ride on sidewalk sometimes.

I tried this Fuji cross bike today.....I loved everything except I didnt feel a tension/kick/punch in the initial pedaling. Yes it has is resistant gears but basically I want more power in the mechanism somewhere. I basically want a fast muscle road bike thats can take crappy streets a tad better than a road bike; im not looking for a tank.
I do think the wider tires slow it down, I could feel it when I tried the Fuji.

Like I said, I liked this Fuji but after having tested several bikes, I know I can find something similar with a little more
tension/umph. So yeah a Cross fits the bill, but I want a lightish, nimble one.

https://www.performancebike.com/bike...400318__400318

Bottom Bracketress Fit BB86
Brakes: TRP SPYRE-C mechanical disc with 160mm/140mm rotors
Cassette: Shimano 105, 11-speed, 11/28T
Chain: KMC X11 with QuickLink
Crankset: Oval 520 46/36T Cross Compact
Fork: Fuji FC-770 carbon with alloy tapered steerer tube, 48mm Offset
Frame: Fuji A6-SL 6066 aluminum frame, Press Fit BB86, tapered head tube
Frame Bottom Bracket:
Frame Fork:
Frame Fork Travel:
Frame Front Derailleur:
Frame Headset Size:
Frame Material:
Frame Replaceable Dropout:
Frame Seatpost:
Frame Weight:
Front Derailleur: Shimano 105 FD-5800 with 34.9mm clamp
Grips/Tape: Oval 300, Suede
Handlebar: Oval 310, alloy, 31.8mm
Headset: FSA Orbit C-40-ACB 1-1/8" -1-1/2"
Levers: Shimano 105
Pedals: N/A
Rack Mounts: N/A
Rear Derailleur: Shimano 105 RD-5800 SS 11-speed
Rear Shock:
Saddle: Oval 300 with steel rails
Seatpost: Oval 300, alloy 27.2mm dia., 2-bolt
Shifters: Shimano ST-5800
Stem: Oval 313, alloy, 7-degree rise, 31.8mm dia.
Tires: Clement Crusade PDX 700x33, 120TPI
Wheelset: Vera Corsa DPD 22 clinchers, 20/24 spoke count bladed
Rating: 4

Garfield Cat

Other than that Fuji cross bike, what else do you ride?

gregf83 

Unfortunately, you're going to have to provide that yourself. Get a decent, light, bike that fits with quality 28mm tires and you should be fine.

fietsbob

What about the category "Fitness Bike" ? straight bars ( you can always add bar end/comfort grips)

so you sit up more.. as you say..

In Trek, thats their FX line.. add fast slick tires if you don't like what they ship with, as standard..


Higher cost gets you a lighter bike (though Carbon frames may be overspending, as an urban commuter)..


Personally I run Trekking bars, all the height, comfort & convenience of flat bars, but their figure 8 bend offers mucho hand positions..

PepeM

Bikes don't have engines (well, some do) so if you want more 'punch' you'll have to train more.

SquidPuppet

What?

Spoonrobot 

It's not the wider tires, it's the fact that they're knobbies. Get smooth tread tires in 32/35/40 and you'll be happy. I ride a 42mm-tired allroad bike in Atlanta and have been very happy with both performance and feel on the local roads but really I didn't have a problem on 23s, 25s, 28s, etc. either. Where are you riding on the sidewalk? I can't think of many places where that would be required or safer than the road. A few hundred feet here and there to connect roads, sure. But just riding on the sidewalk as a thing? No I don't see that as a good idea.

Atlanta is a bike city-the drivers are just rude about it.

Wildwood 

Welcome to BF.
Someone recommended 28mm tires, but a bad choice for city riding, curb hopping, potholes, etc.

If the initial pedaling was sluggish you were in the wrong gear. If you want 'power in the mechanism' find an e-bike, they work great in city situations when the human power needs/wants augmentation.

Wildwood 

Atlanta as a bike city? Some good areas nearby, but anytime I've been in greater Atlanta I never missed a bike.

Spoonrobot 

You don't know what you don't know. Lack of representation in nationwide rankings/publicity contributes to lack of reputation.

"Greater Atlanta" does not equal Atlanta. The city itself is a bike city, it should not be lumped in with all the outlying suburbs.

Darth Lefty 

That bike looks like a terrific spec for the price.

There's a feeling I get from some bikes but not others, that every bit of effort put into the pedal is being turned into forward motion. It's the frame and wheel design, and the geometry. I've gotten this from aluminum and steel, fat tires and thin. But every bike that has given me this has been made of road-bike tubing and has had good wheels. I get it on my Paramount (steel sport touring bike from 1976) and I got it on my Cannondale R2000 (aluminum racing bike from Y2K) and from an Expert TG (a steel racing bike from the early 90's) but not from my current commuter, a Cannondale XR800 which is a cross bike and is a combination of road triangle and MTB rear end, and not from my Super Sport which was h.e.a.v.y. There's a category of bike called a "sport touring" bike that is not so popular now. It has medium reach caliper brakes to clear medium tires plus fenders, and may have a more relaxed posture and lower gearing, but it's made of nice road bike tubing with nice road bike wheels. The major manufacturers are mostly pushing "gravel bikes" or "cross commuters" for this marketing niche but they are not quite what I mean. Examples you can buy today... https://www.bikeforums.net/commuting/...nar-sport.html

Rolling resistance is nearly all in the tires. Knobby tires, even good ones, are just not going to be very great on the road, and construction matters a lot too. Skinny vs fat tires is a popular topic and you can read up on it, but I think if you are sticking in the 28 to 32 mm tire range, it's sort of secondary to quality.

canklecat

I'd rather have a gravel bike geometry than cross, but that's because of the roads I encounter.

The Fuji looks good. First thing I'd change would be the tires. Save 'em for actual cyclocross or gravel rides. As an all-rounder compromise I like Continental Speed Rides. If the 700x42 size is too wide (they're actually closer to 38 wide), try the Conti Cyclocross Speed tires -- same design, 700x35 to meet UCI specs (not sure whether that tire width limitation still applies). Not aggressive for mucky conditions, but grippy on gravel and dry open fields, and smooth rolling on pavement.

They seem tough too. I've bombed across unavoidable potholes and uneven pavement ledges around town, no problems. Got a puncture a couple of weeks ago, running across a pyramid shaped chunk of glass about the size of a small marble or large bb, hidden in the grass and leaves. It would have punctured any tire. Just barely poked through the fiber puncture shield and nicked the tube. No gashes left in the tread or inner shield.

They can be run up to 85 psi, but I like 'em around 50 psi. Comfortable but not squishy or sluggish.

loboseb

Bear with me..I have never owned a drop bar road bike, so this is all new to me. First time Im getting to learn about components, materials, etc. Im looking for a bike for rough and fast city riding bike. Zero intention of gravel or cross racing. In my city, lots of bad roads, some hills, drivers not used to bikes all the time, lots of cars, I sometimes have to ride sidewalks and yes occassional light urban trails. So I need a punchy, fast nimble, stride efficient, obedient bike for city use (it would be great if I can take it for a weekend of touring IF I ever do that).

I tried the Fuji Cross 2.0 again today and loved its very upright position of the handle bars, nimble, sporty, agile,exciting.... but.... not so efficient in revolutions per stride....(more pedaling involved).

I compared back and forth with a Fuji Sportif road bike which was smoother, faster/more efficient per stride, upright too, just maybe a tad not as "exciting" as the Fuji cross.

The guy at the store explained that the Fuji Sportif has a 50/34 Crankset while the Fuji Cross has a 46/36. He mentioned I could consider changing the crankset on the Fuji cross from 46/36 to 50/36 for more efficient/stronger output per stride.

Thoughts on that idea? Worth it? Should I just look at more road bike and add fatter tires??

Heres the FUJI Sportif....which was nice but also got me wondering...hmmm what about the even nicer Fuji road bikes like the Fuji Gran Fondo series.....?

https://www.performancebike.com/bike...egoryId=400306

But then I also just looked at the higher tier Fuji Cross bikes, same series....some have Hydrolic and Im not sure how much better the components are over the 2.0?

https://www.performancebike.com/weba...7128%2C1186347

loboseb

I went to bimke store today and tried thr same Fuji cross again.
https://www.performancebike.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/mProduct4_10551_10052_1193323_-1

Like I said earlier,I love the handling, nimble, sporty, upright position but wish for more efficiency per stride. I asked the store person how i could get more efficiency per stride and he said i could consider replacing the Fujis Cross outer "part"? of the crank set from 46 to a 50, thus turning it into 50/36. Thoughts?

Also changing the tires to flatter ones may have a little impact. But at that point im like....all these changes already??

I tried another Fuji but a Roadbike, Sportif 1.0LE. More efficient per stride, smoother, faster a road bike. But not as exciting as the cross.

Keep in mind im doing all city riding but i like to not worry so much about crappy roads and bkow through cracks, bumps, etc

https://www.performancebike.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/mProduct4_10551_10052_1163275_-1_catNav

loboseb

Bear with me..I have never owned a drop bar road bike, so this is all new to me. First time Im getting to learn about components, materials, etc. Im looking for a bike for rough and fast city riding bike. Zero intention of gravel or cross racing. In my city, lots of bad roads, some hills, drivers not used to bikes all the time, lots of cars, I sometimes have to ride sidewalks and yes occassional light urban trails. So I need a punchy, fast nimble, stride efficient, obedient bike for city use (it would be great if I can take it for a weekend of touring IF I ever do that).

I tried the Fuji Cross 2.0 again today and loved its very upright position of the handle bars, nimble, sporty, agile,exciting.... but.... not so efficient in revolutions per stride....(more pedaling involved).

I compared back and forth with a Fuji Sportif road bike which was smoother, faster/more efficient per stride, upright too, just maybe a tad not as "exciting" as the Fuji cross.

The guy at the store explained that the Fuji Sportif has a 50/34 Crankset while the Fuji Cross has a 46/36. He mentioned I could consider changing the crankset on the Fuji cross from 46/36 to 50/36 for more efficient/stronger output per stride.

Thoughts on that idea? Worth it? Should I just look at more road bike and add fatter tires??

Heres the FUJI Sportif....which was nice but also got me wondering...hmmm what about the even nicer Fuji road bikes like the Fuji Gran Fondo series.....?

https://www.performancebike.com/bike...egoryId=400306

But then I also just looked at the higher tier Fuji Cross bikes, same series....some have Hydrolic and Im not sure how much better the components are over the 2.0?

https://www.performancebike.com/weba...7128%2C1186347

loboseb

Atlanta is not a well developed bike friendly city. Its slowly getting there but its not. I have been to real bike friendly cities and Atlanta is not remotely close.

nycphotography

cross bike, the fuji will be fine. 25mm tires, maybe lighter wheels depending on how heavy the stock ones are, and.... pay attention to what you're riding through. no curb hopping.

you want to drive it like a tank, you'll need it built like a tank.

do you go blasting through potholes and broken roads hitting everything in sight in a boxster? No, didn't think so.

loboseb

Tried the Fuji Cross again today. Love it; nimble, upright position, lots of control, great on turns.......only thing is.... the stride efficiency falls short/is not enough for me. I compared to a Fuji road bike, a Sportif 1.0 LE which was smooth, quicker, more efficient per stride. The store guy explained that its, besides the difference in tires, the crankset: 46/36 on the Cross vs 50/34 on the Sportif road bike. He mentioned I could consider changing the outer part of the crankset from 46 to 50 thus converting the Cross into a 50/36. Thoughts?
I think I would end up adding less knobby tires too. But at that point....why not just get a different bike, like a road bike and add fatter tires....?

Fyi, I dont intend to cross race or gravel race at all. City use only.

Wildwood 

Chainring gearing is important, based on the terrain you will experience and the cogset (cassette) on the rear. Very hilly might want smaller chainrings, as the cassette stops at 28.

Tires of 32 - 35mm are better for a well used city utility-type bike. I think the cross bike is the right choice.

Maelochs

46/36 is probably not bad for a heavy bike on hilly terrain. Your descriptive phrases really don't describe anything; for instance, “ ... it has is resistant gears but basically I want more power in the mechanism somewhere.” doesn’t really convey a message, nor does “.... the stride efficiency falls short/is not enough for me.”

I have no clue what “stride efficiency” might be. Nor “resistant gearing.” What is a “a fast muscle road bike”?

Trying to guess ... It seems you like to start riding in a higher gear, with more force needed to turn the pedals ... which will, in fact, make you start more slowly, but you might feel like you are doing more work and like that better.

(For what it’s worth, spinning a lower gear faster is more efficient than stamping out a larger gear at lower RPM ... but, whatever ... if you like stamping on big gears, go for it.)

When starting off, you shouldn’t notice any difference between a 46- or a 50-tooth chainring, because you should be using low enough gears in back that the overall ratio wouldn’t come close to the top ratios. You might find the 46-tooth ring wasn’t big enough for top speed—riding above 25 mph or whatever—but I doubt you would be doing a lot of that on most commutes where you are dodging potholes and hopping onto sidewalks.

However ... you certainly could buy a bike with a 50/36 crankset. The only issue would be making sure the frame/fork would accept wider tires.

Shop carefully. If the pavement is as bad as you say, and also if you like jumping on and off curbs, you will want 32–45 mm tires, I’d think .... and sturdy wheels (which will be heavy and slow off the line.)

If you ride more reasonably, 32–35 mm tires should be fine, 32–36-spoke wheels, which isn’t too extreme for most road frames.

Riding position can be adjusted with spacers under the stem, and different stem lengths and angles, so you don’t have to be bent all the way over with your knees hitting your stomach .... you can set up the bars level with the seat or even above. Make sure the frame fits your body, and will accept the set-up you want. Normally I suggest buying a smaller frame, but you would probably want a right-sized or a size larger—less seatpost exposure, higher stem.

A better idea might be a Giant Contend or something ... a frame with a taller head tube and shorter top tube. Check on tire fit.

PepeM

Thought I had heard it all but 'stride efficiency' is a new one.

PepeM

Unless you were going over 30mph (you weren't) changing your outer ring would achieve absolutely nothing.


Tires are a wear item, so changing them is no big deal. Getting nice road tires would make that bike a bit faster.

If you liked the Sportif so much, why not just get that one?

Darth Lefty 

Oh no, it's going to be a gearing thread after all! 46-11 is plenty for any normal human, that's my opinion. The difference between 46 and 50 is less than one rear shift. I really blame the getup-and-go on wheels or tires or frame. Both your candidates are very similar with aluminum frames and apparently the same wheels and fork. The road bike might sit more upright and it might have a lower bottom gear (34-32 vs 36-28). The cross bike might have more ground clearance. But I can find little on the Web about these models, the Performance site seems to be the only place they exist since they are exclusive models and the Sportif version is giving me 404 errors and I can't find a geometry chart for the Cross.

The reason not to get a road bike and install larger tires, is usually that they may not fit, especially not with fenders, but looking at the two models there's very little difference, is there?

loboseb

Hahaha, make fun of my post, lol! I know this was a terrible post and yes Im new at learning about bike components and what they do.

Thanks for the advice.

No, not all of the roads in ATL are terrible and no I wouldn't just carelessly ride over every pothole, road crack, bump and sidewalk. So, I dont think I need too wide knobby tires.

The Fuji Sportif road bike is still a contender in my hunt. But, both times I have tried the Fuji Cross, it has "something" that I like a lot...... but like i said, my pedaling strides being equal on both bikes, the Sportif gets going faster quicker, smoother shifting, but maybe not as easy to maneuver as the Cross when turning. I felt "safer" in the Cross, more in control. Again Im not used to drop bars.

I could tell the Sportif is somehow a finer bike overall. But like I said I liked aspects on the Cross.

So now, when I go back I will try another Fuji, the Fuji Tread.

Performance Bike - Product Comparison

PepeM

The Tread might be a good one. It is somewhere in between those two. I test rode one a year or two ago and liked it.