That would mean I would be supporting the 29 trend. Sorry cant do it.
woo yeah brah stick to your guns, that'll show 'em
"Nobody really gives a shit that you don't like the thing that you have no firsthand experience with." Dave
Steel Cross Bikes with Discs?
I am 5'9" ish with a long torso and 28.5" inseam. The frame I have now is almost the same in sizing as the 52 there. I am still trying to finalize the stem length. running a 6 deg 90mm but could do 110.
Others on here will have different opinions, and a lot more experience fitting bikes than me.
It really makes a difference to have it properly fit esp if there is an LBS you can go to.
I just sized up from the equivalent of 48 on the chart, and man what a difference for the better.I do fit for road, cross, and touring bikesand if there's one thing I've concluded it's that I can't recommend a frame size until I see someone riding it in the stationary trainer or on the adjustable fit bike. Sorry!
That is good advice, When I bout my first and only road bike I sized it like I would a MTB and it feels a bit long.
is going big on a bike the only way to get you stoked on the sport? what happened to riding with your bros, travelling, and riding unique places, to get people stoked on riding?
fines are useless. there needs to be more punches to the throat.
woo yeah brah stick to your guns, that'll show 'em
"Be the change you want to see in the world" my trolly friend. Right or wrong I am a man who sticks to his guns.
is going big on a bike the only way to get you stoked on the sport? what happened to riding with your bros, travelling, and riding unique places, to get people stoked on riding?
fines are useless. there needs to be more punches to the throat.
what's the difference between a cyclocross bike and a 29er?
"Nobody really gives a shit that you don't like the thing that you have no firsthand experience with." Dave
what's the difference between a cyclocross bike and a 29er?
29er will generally have a shorter head tube, longer top tube (designed for flat bar), slacker head angle, and longer chain stays. Of course there are exceptions to some of these standards but, in general, geometry numbers between a 29er and a CX bike will be quite different.
As set up, looks hideous.
There's almost more headset spacers than actual head tube!
Oh yeah, let's get back to that…
Does the same person ride these two bikes? Or at the very least, did the same person set them up? Would you just look at that…
on a limb to say the vassago was bought used and the frame is too small…
knowledge
that was meant as a (rhetorical) question for the op, who i am going to go out on a limb and guess is not making a distinction between the two in terms of geometry:
I don't understand how the Geo works with these bikes? What makes a Cross?
but ok morg, lets get into it
29er will generally have a shorter head tube, longer top tube
a big part of the reason for both of these general rules is that (as you note) 29ers usually have flat/riser bars, whereas cross bikes are run with drops. a 29er built to accommodate or intended to be run with drop bars won't conform to this, however (see: singular peregrine). the exception proves the rule but only for a given assumption
slacker head angle
recent trend in 29ers (and bikes overall) is to go a bit slacker, but most 29ers are xc bikes, and from what i can tell the typical (classic?) 29er runs a 72* hta…
A classic cross bike will have a head angle of ~72-73º.
so, pretty close.
and longer chain stays.
meh. let's take surly as an example, they've probably been offering both a cross frame and a 29er frame for longer than anyone:
- surly cross check chain stay length: 425mm
- surly karate monkey chain stay length: 431mm
so the karate monkey has a slightly longer cs length, but then its intended to run much fatter tires… while generally you are correct, i would like to state for the record that the bike being cited as a 29er (vassago fisticuff) has a sub 17" cs length…
in general, geometry numbers between a 29er and a CX bike will be quite different.
gotta disagree with you there
not saying there aren't differences, but the geometry ones are pretty slight and when you get to the edges of each realm (vassago fisticuff, for example) things get bit blurry. essentially, both cross and 29er bikes run big wheels off road in conditions on the lighter end of the tech spectrum (user skill notwithstanding). my point in posing the rhetorical question was this: if you want a certain type of bike which is (as we are discovering) not so easy to find, shouldn't you be less concerned with arbitrary labels and foolish prejudices and more concerned about finding something that on the basis of numbers and features fits what you're after?
edit: oooh looky!
"Nobody really gives a shit that you don't like the thing that you have no firsthand experience with." Dave
edit: oooh looky!
Look Boom thanks for your e-pinions. Now take note, I am not into 29ers at all. I am looking for a steel cross bike with discs, as the tittle states. Please do not derail this tread with 29er and 29er vs cross geo talk.
is going big on a bike the only way to get you stoked on the sport? what happened to riding with your bros, travelling, and riding unique places, to get people stoked on riding?
fines are useless. there needs to be more punches to the throat.
what's the difference between a cyclocross bike and a 29er?
This either sounds like the setup to an awesome punchline, or the title of an Xtranormal video featuring two anthropomorphic hipsters and the line "Alleycats were so 2005, and polo is way too mainstream now."
Oh, looky, paying over original retail + shipping for someone's used frameset!
Look Boom thanks for your e-pinions. Now take note, I am not into 29ers at all. I am looking for a steel cross bike with discs, as the tittle states. Please do not derail this tread with 29er and 29er vs cross geo talk.
Unfortunately you are dealing with a genre that crosses over quite a bit. If you are such a purist, you might as well jump on some reasons why your ideal bike is different than a "29er"…
a big part of the reason for both of these general rules is that (as you note) 29ers usually have flat/riser bars, whereas cross bikes are run with drops. a 29er built to accommodate or intended to be run with drop bars won't conform to this, however (see: singular peregrine). the exception proves the rule but only for a given assumption
recent trend in 29ers (and bikes overall) is to go a bit slacker, but most 29ers are xc bikes, and from what i can tell the typical (classic?) 29er runs a 72* hta…
meh. let's take surly as an example, they've probably been offering both a cross frame and a 29er frame for longer than anyone:
- surly cross check chain stay length: 425mm
- surly karate monkey chain stay length: 431mm
The three disagreements you have are:
- head tube length
- head tube angle
- chainstay length
If the exception proves the rule; show me some 29ers with all of the below:
- longer than 125mm head tube on the "large" size
- 72º or steeper head angle
- 425 mm or shorter chain stay
What we are really delineating here is what "cross" bikes could be considered "29ers" and vice versa. Of course there is crossover with cross builders that like to shralp and 29er builders that are more race oriented.
my point in posing the rhetorical question was this: if you want a certain type of bike which is (as we are discovering) not so easy to find, shouldn't you be less concerned with arbitrary labels and foolish prejudices and more concerned about finding something that on the basis of numbers and features fits what you're after?
Yes! But I still think the categories are distinguishable, and the numbers and features which are desirable in a cross bike are even harder to find in anything labelled "29er." The light steel disc market is pretty thin, though, which we can all agree on.
If the exception proves the rule; show me some 29ers with all of the below:
- longer than 125mm head tube on the "large" size
- 72º or steeper head angle
- 425 mm or shorter chain stay
large kona unit: 129/73/434
xlarge surly karate monkey: 129/72/431
large origin8 scout: 119/72/426
i, i can't do it
but, i think it's the chainstay length that's killing the comparison, and the one seemingly incontrovertible difference between cx and 29er bikes is tire clearance, so i feel like you have to give on the cs length because NO ONE wants a bike you can't run fatties on, not even this guy
Blows that it has shitty tire clearance.
:P
"Nobody really gives a shit that you don't like the thing that you have no firsthand experience with." Dave
Unfortunately you are dealing with a genre that crosses over quite a bit. If you are such a purist, you might as well jump on some reasons why your ideal bike is different than a "29er"…
Morgman, Thanks for all the info. I know nothing about cross bikes and this thread has more then doubled my knowledge on them. LoL
but, i think it's the chainstay length that's killing the comparison, and the one seemingly incontrovertible difference between cx and 29er bikes is tire clearance, so i feel like you have to give on the cs length because NO ONE wants a bike you can't run fatties on, not even this guy:P
Boom, Thanks for the letting us know that if tire cleance is an issue we could get a 29er frame. The mud up can get quite thick do to the high amount of clay in spots. But I am not willing to buy a 29er so please drop it.
is going big on a bike the only way to get you stoked on the sport? what happened to riding with your bros, travelling, and riding unique places, to get people stoked on riding?
fines are useless. there needs to be more punches to the throat.
Forum jump:
