I don't understand cyclo-cross bikes

DePurpereWolf

So, I am interested in cyclo-cross bikes because they seem like good alrounders. A fast bike for the wet and wetter seasons of Cork. They seem to be like road bikes but better suited for the crappier road surfaces, like mud, rocks, etc. etc.

But I look at cyclo cross events, and I see cyclists slipping and sliding over muddy tracks with lots of bends and bunny hopping over stuff and then picking the bike up, etc. etc.

I am probably wrong, but it seems to me that a mountainbike (hard-tail) would be much more suited for this kind of work. And why do these bikes not have flat bars, I don't think air resistance and different hand positions is that important in such a short track.

When I look at a cyclocross bike I see myself doing the same as on a road bike, but then over dirt tracks instead of Tarmac. Like not to hilly mountainbike trails.

What am I missing with these cyclo-cross bikes

Lumen

The purpose of cyclocross is to inflict as much misery as possible on the participants.

DePurpereWolf

I guess I can understand that. But I don't understand the design of the bike for the purpose.

For one, you could remove the saddle for added discomfort.

It just seems like you could do so much more fun things with a cyclo-cross bike than doing a grueling cyclo-cross event. I would think a mountainbike would be better for the job

Enduro

I mountain bike lots, and do plenty of training on road bike. I've done one cyclocross race and I agree with your broad point. I think the whole sport is a hangover from when there was no such thing as mountainbiking. I now consider cyclocross to be a waste of potentially enjoyable mountain biking time, and wouldn't be bothered doing it again.

However I can think of a usw for the bikes... but in an adventure racing context, where their extra road and trail speed over a mountain bike could be advantagous in some races.

Wez

I see cyclocross bikes as a half cast between MTBing and road racing.. Just another neish to market bikes for!

The way I see it, there's MTBing, road racing and fixed gears.. Bmx and other similar sports maybe, but cyclocross definitely is not up there with the real cycling sports!

billy.fish

Wez wrote: »

I see cyclocross bikes as a half cast between MTBing and road racing.. Just another neish to market bikes for!

The way I see it, there's MTBing, road racing and fixed gears.. Bmx and other similar sports maybe, but cyclocross definitely is not up there with the real cycling sports!

You ever raced cross?

Try it.

Try lugging your MTB around on your shoulder with 10kg of mud on it and tell me its well designed for it.

If you want to be honest about it, mountain biking is the little kid who hangs around with cross who is a bit to scared to push itself so dresses itself up in warm clothes and padding in-case it falls over and gets wet.

By far the best form of cycle racing there is. Have a go. Its only been around a hundred years, it'll catch on soon....

On that note, first cross sessions of the season are starting up next week. Open invite to all.

blorg

A cyclocross bike will be faster than a mountain bike over a cyclocross course. Cross has a long history well preceding MTB and BMX by the way (started in France with the first National Championship in 1902.)

sean_d

Have you ever tried it? Its one of the most fun, exciting forms of bike racing.

Cyclocross bikes are built the way they are for a reason - they're the best possible design for the terrain they encounter in cyclocross racing.
CX bikes are far faster over grassy, muddy terrain than a mountain bike, and are actually controllable down steep sliddery banks and the like...plus getting a high speed corner on a CX bike just exactly right is one of the most thrilling feelings going.

The idea of using them off-road (on fireroads and such) seems to crop up more and more on American fora, obviously as a result of them having extensive unpaved trail networks, but I'd much rather go proper mountainbiking than that...

So yeah, they seem like a bit of a bastard child when they're not being used for their intended purpose, but they work quite well on their home patch...

Lumen

billy.fish wrote: »

On that note, first cross sessions of the season are starting up next week. Open invite to all.

I'm so excited my toes are tingling.

Will singlespeed be a major disadvantage for training sessions? I'm running a pretty easy gear (42x16).

Raam

Still in the market for a good sub 1000e cross bike. Are the planet x ones any good? http://www.planet-x-warehouse.co.uk/acatalog/Kaffenback_and_Uncle_John_Drop_Bar_Builds.html

Lumen: are you back to fitness for the cross stuff we are down for?

wotdef

Cyclo-cross was developed for the roadies who still wanted competition during the winter months, same as track was with the 6 day events being a big draw on the continent. Just because you dont understand it dont knock it. Whether it's road, track, grass, muddy field or mountainside we are all doing what we love most...Being on two wheels. Lack of understanding years back pushed BMXers towards motocross instead of keeping them on bicycles.

Lumen

Raam wrote: »

Lumen: are you back to fitness for the cross stuff we are down for?

Getting there. I have most of my (limited) flexibility back, not too much pain and can walk OK. Hoping to get back on the bike this week and see how it goes, maybe a bit of running too.

If I don't make the first one I will at least make the third or fourth.

DePurpereWolf

sean_d wrote: »

Have you ever tried it? Its one of the most fun, exciting forms of bike racing.

Cyclocross bikes are built the way they are for a reason - they're the best possible design for the terrain they encounter in cyclocross racing.
CX bikes are far faster over grassy, muddy terrain than a mountain bike, and are actually controllable down steep sliddery banks and the like...plus getting a high speed corner on a CX bike just exactly right is one of the most thrilling feelings going.

The idea of using them off-road (on fireroads and such) seems to crop up more and more on American fora, obviously as a result of them having extensive unpaved trail networks, but I'd much rather go proper mountainbiking than that...

So yeah, they seem like a bit of a bastard child when they're not being used for their intended purpose, but they work quite well on their home patch...

I guess what I thought of when looking at these cx bikes was to have a much longer track of both dirt and tarmac roads. So like a road-bike, but with rougher terrain. I didn't expect the tracks to be so short (and full of obstacles.)
I'm not saying cx is bad, It's just not for me. I think I would agree with people saying they would rather do a mountain bike track then a cx.

I just wonder how many people by a cx bike to use it as a winter road bike.

billy.fish

Lumen wrote: »

I'm so excited my toes are tingling.

Will singlespeed be a major disadvantage for training sessions? I'm running a pretty easy gear (42x16).

Thats not tingling, thats the blood returning from last year...

Racing on a single....nutter Sure most of the time you only get one gear that works anyway...i rode single 42 on the front and 9 on the back last year and it was good. Except on the home course, St Annes needs a BIG ring on the front.

RAAM: I have a UJC, quite like it, nimble, but me thinks a bit to big for me, not to weighty either. Did all last season on it, 3 peaks, and some other little things (Ballinstoe, 3 rock) in prep for 3 peaks. Good bikes!

billy.fish

DePurpereWolf wrote: »

..... I just wonder how many people by a cx bike to use it as a winter road bike.

Ironic, but i use mine as a summer training bike on the road...

blorg

DePurpereWolf wrote: »

I guess what I thought of when looking at these cx bikes was to have a much longer track of both dirt and tarmac roads. So like a road-bike, but with rougher terrain. I didn't expect the tracks to be so short (and full of obstacles.)
I'm not saying cx is bad, It's just not for me. I think I would agree with people saying they would rather do a mountain bike track then a cx.

I just wonder how many people by a cx bike to use it as a winter road bike.

Well it's a race, I don't know that many people go pottering around cyclocross courses the same way you might go for a leisurely spin on either a road bike or MTB. Road racing is pretty painful too, I haven't raced MTB but imagine it is as well if you are doing it properly. So cross racing is what it is and a cross bike is the fastest over those courses, despite what you might think a MTB would be substantially slower.

Although I have not yet raced cross, I actually have two cyclocross frames (my Van Nicholas Amazon tourer and a fixed Tricross.) The Amazon I got mainly as I wanted the option of wider tyres for light off-road- I had done the Camino before on 700x35c Marathons and this was a good choice for our 75% on road/25% light trail use. The Tricross I got because it was a good deal and I wanted a fixed commuter that would take rack and mudguards.

Note we are talking tracks like in this picture, I do not believe you need tyres that wide for tarmac roads no matter how bad they are- also note that cross tyres are knobbly and designed more for wet grass, they are not nice at all to cycle on the road.



I plan to try cross racing myself this winter, probably starting out with my old tourer but might use the Van Nicholas if I get into it...

As regards winter bike, I don't think there is a massive argument for getting a cross bike. For a winter bike not brought off road I don't think you particularly need the wide tyre options so a standard road bike with race blades or an audax bike that takes full mudguards would be adaquate. You start to get into funky braking systems with cross bikes and they do tend to be heavier than a road bike.

DirkVoodoo

Remember too that cross racing involves a lot of short running sections where riders sling the bike over their shoulder. This would be a little more difficult with a mountain bike. In fact it's a big part, including doing that quick dismount/mount that they do. Odd folk those cyclocross poeple.

osnola ibax

I've just bought a cyclo cross bike as my first proper bike, for commuting and some cardio training other than running (nearly said cross training there which could have been very misleading). From what I have read though lately I'm not sure I got the right bike for the job. Maybe I should have just gone for a proper road racer?

DirkVoodoo

osnola ivax wrote: »

I've just bought a cyclo cross bike as my first proper bike, for commuting and some cardio training other than running (nearly said cross training there which could have been very misleading). From what I have read though lately I'm not sure I got the right bike for the job. Maybe I should have just gone for a proper road racer?

Yup. I think there is this perception that road bikes are fragile and the tyres too narrow for them to be stable, which is all nonsense of course.

You should take up cyclocross, then the bike will make more sense.

blorg

osnola ivax wrote: »

I've just bought a cyclo cross bike as my first proper bike, for commuting and some cardio training other than running (nearly said cross training there which could have been very misleading). From what I have read though lately I'm not sure I got the right bike for the job. Maybe I should have just gone for a proper road racer?

You have the bike now so enjoy it but unless you want to race cross or specifically need/want some feature that a cyclocross bike provides (mainly the option to fit wider tyres) you would probably be better off with a road racer, yes. Certainly change the tyres for narrower slicks. Having said that you can certainly get as good training out of the cross bike, only real disadvantages would be a slight weight penalty and funky braking. The two I have probably aren't quite as "racy" as my road bike either but maybe could be adjusted...

Lumen

osnola ivax wrote: »

I've just bought a cyclo cross bike as my first proper bike, for commuting and some cardio training other than running (nearly said cross training there which could have been very misleading). From what I have read though lately I'm not sure I got the right bike for the job. Maybe I should have just gone for a proper road racer?

Relax, there's not much difference between a racer and a CX bike. You have just exchanged a little braking performance for the ability to fit a wider selection of tyres and go off road if you fancy it.

Lumen

Raam wrote: »

Still in the market for a good sub 1000e cross bike. Are the planet x ones any good? http://www.planet-x-warehouse.co.uk/acatalog/Kaffenback_and_Uncle_John_Drop_Bar_Builds.html

FAQ.

Looks great.

Massive head tube - 225mm on the XL (your size) including external headset. I guess this is a good thing for cross?

Rack and mudguard mounts, happy days.

I would love a Van Dessel Gin & Trombones, just for the completely ludicrous name.

Raam

For cyclo-x I was advised to go a size smaller than what I'd normally use. So 56cm for me, whatever that equates to on a PX, large I guess

That Van Dessel is a beaut!

Lumen

Raam wrote: »

For cyclo-x I was advised to go a size smaller than what I'd normally use. So 56cm for me, whatever that equates to on a PX

I've read conflicting opinions on that, but I assume you got your advice from someone who actually races in Ireland, which trumps my Googling.

I get the impression that cross bike choice/setup depends on conditions, and that European and US cross racing conditions are quite different. E.g. low bb = sharper cornering, high bb = pedalling round corners.

I'd probably go for shorter cranks anyway, since that'll give better clearance.

Dave's single chainring + bash ring setup looks good too, 42 ring and 12-25/27 seem popular. I guess if you can't cycle it you can carry it.

Raam

Lumen wrote: »

I've read conflicting opinions on that, but I assume you got your advice from someone who actually races in Ireland, which trumps my Googling.

One of the lads from Swords was telling me that.

billy.fish

I suppose the one thing i always think about cross is this, assuming you are racing:

If your gearing is to high you could probably run faster so why bother. 42*(whateveryoulike) is a good way to go. Until you get on a fast course and get spun out. Not to may of them though.

For most races i've done you dont want either end of the spectrum,just run a bit before and get fit and its all good.

Cross evening sessions will also be starting up soon in Knocklyon for anyone thinking of giving it a bash, bring a MTB or CX bike its all good! Then in a few weeks we will be starting a Thursday night session north side of the city...assuming i get my thumb out of my behind

dave2pvd

Lumen wrote: »

I've read conflicting opinions on that, but I assume you got your advice from someone who actually races in Ireland, which trumps my Googling.

I get the impression that cross bike choice/setup depends on conditions, and that European and US cross racing conditions are quite different. E.g. low bb = sharper cornering, high bb = pedalling round corners.

I'd probably go for shorter cranks anyway, since that'll give better clearance.

Dave's single chainring + bash ring setup looks good too, 42 ring and 12-25/27 seem popular. I guess if you can't cycle it you can carry it.

Lumen, keep in mind that this country is bloody huge. Conditions in New England can be Arctic. Colder than Ireland with more snow. Conditions here in Georgia (latitude same as Morocco) would only be equivalent occasionally. Although we do get similar temperatures to Ireland in the Winter. So, somewhere in between might be Maryland; it's average Winter temperatures might be broadly similar to Ireland. But, let's face it, no where rains as much as Ireland

I went with a 56. My road bike is a 57. Seems to work.

I do a lot of my on-road training on the 'cross bike. Not much difference in performance. Luckily for me, I include braking performance in that statement. Critical that you have good cantis, properly set up.

My bike set up on the 'cross bike is very close to the road bike. Some minor differences: the bars are shallow drop and the stem puts the bars 1cm closer and 1cm higher. Beyond that, just the matter of almost 2Kg in weight mismatch.

'Cross bikes make excellent hackers. The frames are more heavily built than those of racing bikes (danger: blanket statement :eek:). They put up with more abuse. Frequently, they can be had pretty cheaply, so there are less tears when one is crashed/stolen/violently torn off a roof-rack in an underground car park.

Dromcarrig

The reason I use it as a training bike is that it is more comfortable and allows me use roads you wouldn't normally use on a road bike. I also plan to use it at night during the winter and so again won't have to worry as much about road surface.

Lumen

So I was properly introduced to CX yesterday at the Swords training session.

Great fun, and almost no bleeding at all. We were like a bunch of kids mucking around on big BMXs.

After seeing Gordon going round on his Cervelo R3 with 23mm slicks* (and Zipps!), I'm a bit less bothered by the equipment aspect, although my 42x16 was a bit of a problem for my bad back. My studded ice tyres were fine, so I might just keep them on for the winter.

* where was that thread about "I need a mountain bike because my commute involves crossing a bit of grass"?

billy.fish

Good session alright, once you got over that little bit of single track the rest was fine! Lucky the weather held off as long as it did, made the course nice and greasy for the dismount/mount practice.

Saying that i managed to bin myself twice, before it got slippy... my ass is sore today

For a man who'd not rode cross you rode well, deffo get out to the next one on Saturday, get a few other heads out as-well.

kierank01

Wez wrote: »

I see cyclocross bikes as a half cast between MTBing and road racing.. Just another neish to market bikes for!

The way I see it, there's MTBing, road racing and fixed gears.. Bmx and other similar sports maybe, but cyclocross definitely is not up there with the real cycling sports!

Ok, so what are 'hybrid' bikes for so?

Lumen

kierank01 wrote: »

Ok, so what are 'hybrid' bikes for so?

There is no sport which requires a hybrid (AFAIK). Hybrids are a form of utility bike.

billy.fish

Hangove/wakeup fail this morning for me. Sorry folks!

See you all next sunday if you are about.

List of races are up now too!

Lumen

Missed it today also, away for the weekend.

My Uncle John is due to arrive on weds, so am on my way to becoming your incompetent twin.

billy.fish

We need a third member then we can be like the marx borthers

I'll be Groucho

blorg

What's the story with this then- is training every Sunday? Where, details details, I am keen to get going!

Morgan

More details of the Swords CC training here:
http://www.madmtb.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2865

Midweek training on the southside starting soon-ish.

Raam

How come no bottle cages?

RobFowl

Raam wrote: »

How come no bottle cages?

UCI regulations, same reason there are no disc brakes allowed :rolleyes:

Morgan

Raam wrote: »

How come no bottle cages?

Bottle cages get in the way when shouldering the bike.

Lumen

AIUI, hot disc brake in the face is not nice, and bottle cages interfere with shouldering.

If you get thirsty you can drink from a muddy puddle or cattle trough. :pac:

Raam

In that case, I guess I should take my Ben-Hur style spikes off my wheel hubs

El Vino

Lumen wrote: »

Missed it today also, away for the weekend.

My Uncle John is due to arrive on weds, so am on my way to becoming your incompetent twin.

Keen to know what you think of the Uncle John, I am considering that or Kinesis Crosslight.

billy.fish

UJC is a good bike

Crosslight is a bit on the flexy side IMHO

Lumen

Still waiting for it to arrive, will post proper impressions then.

The thing that sold me on the UJ was that (in addition to the good price) it appears to be specified for actual cyclocross, e.g. cantis rather than v-brakes, 36/46 chainset and choice of cross-specific tyres, but it also has eyelets for wheelbrows and a rack. You can also choose stem length and handlebar width, which saves hassle swapping parts over with a fixed spec bike.

There is a Focus Mares in my household (similar price) and whilst it seems to do the job the spec is neither as focused or as practical as the UJ.

Out of curiosity, are there many crossers using tubulars? A set of Dugast Rhinos or Tufo Primus on Kinlin TB-25s would be fun to play with, from what I've read. (yeah I know, I should just train more)

Lumen

Lumen wrote: »

Out of curiosity, are there many crossers using tubulars? A set of Dugast Rhinos or Tufo Primus on Kinlin TB-25s would be fun to play with, from what I've read. (yeah I know, I should just train more)

Bike arrived today. More spannering required than Wiggle, but easy enough anyway.

I think I need to learn some mechanical sympathy before I buy fancy wheels.

Time to upgrade....

blorg

How did you do that?

This is what I am hoping to give it a go on. Clearances are tight enough, mud may be an issue. My VN stands in reserve!

DirkVoodoo

Jesus, did you use a tyre iron to get that on or what?

What happened to your "real mechanics" don't need proper tools?

Where are the rest of the photos??

EDIT: It's called "bunnyhopfail", is that what actually happened?

Lumen

blorg wrote: »

How did you do that?

Bunnyhopping over the kerbs outside my house. I got a bit over-excited and possibly pinch flatted before hammering the next curb with a rear flat. Never had this problem on a road bike, thought 70psi was enough but obviously not.

Quite impressed that I managed to disable the bike within 60 seconds of turning a wheel. :pac:

blorg wrote: »

This is what I am hoping to give it a go on. Clearances are tight enough, mud may be an issue. My VN stands in reserve!

Should be fine for training at least.

Lumen

DirkVoodoo wrote: »

Where are the rest of the photos??

Will take some proper ones for Images of Beauty when I have better light.

The paint job is actually really nice, but red doesn't photograph well.

Pedals are bottom of the range eggbeaters.



edit: driveside fail and granny ring in one photo!

blorg

Real mechanics don't need proper tools like torque wrenches. If you have tightened something to the appropriate level thousands of times you will have it by feel.

I don't have this broad range of experience so I need a torque wrench.