Gravel vs CX

[Martygarrison]

Ok I confess what is the difference between a "gravel bike" and a cross bike? I have a focus mares CX1 which works great as my urban commuter here in DC. Is this now known as a "gravel" bike?

[gmcampy]

Thats a CX bike?

[FastforaSlowGuy]

The short answer is: Marketing.

The longer answer is that bike companies have realized that many consumers - like yourself - are buying CX bikes to do things other than race CX. Gravel road rides, commuting, etc. are all growing in popularity, and having a bike that can handle a bit more tire (and maybe has disc brakes) is helpful. So enter the gravel bike segment. Many are just rebadged CX bikes, but increasingly bike companies are tailoring the geometry for this segment: lower BB, longer chain stays, etc, with a goal of making them more comfortable for those who will never bunny hop barriers.

[ergott]

There should be a difference in geometry between gravel grinding and a proper cyclocross bike that's for racing cyclocross. I'll leave that part of the discussion to the frame builders.

[vav]

Drool worthy thread full of "gravel" "adventure" "CX" whatever name you fancy ;)

http://forums.thepaceline.net/showthread.php?t=125867&highlight=gravel

[Martygarrison]

That's a cx bike that's been modified for the streets of DC. Marathon Surpreme 35's, etc...

[firerescuefin]

The short answer is: Marketing.

The longer answer is that bike companies have realized that many consumers - like yourself - are buying CX bikes to do things other than race CX. Gravel road rides, commuting, etc. are all growing in popularity, and having a bike that can handle a bit more tire (and maybe has disc brakes) is helpful. So enter the gravel bike segment. Many are just rebadged CX bikes, but increasingly bike companies are tailoring the geometry for this segment: lower BB, longer chain stays, etc, with a goal of making them more comfortable for those who will never bunny hop barriers.

For the consumer, a lot of what you mention is more than marketing

Kind of restating what you said. Cross bikes certainly can make great gravel bikes. Road bikes with sufficient clearance can do the same. I wanted something with relaxed geo, low BB, longish wheelbase, and big tire clearance when I was researching and purchasing my all arounder/Gravelbike. I wouldn't own both and since I will never race a CX race, I was more drawn to the attributes/nuances of a gravelbike.

[nooneline]

you could also ask this question about the difference between a CX/all-arounder, and a dedicated cyclocross racing bicycle.

A lot of low to mid-level cross bikes are designed to be multipurpose, and yeah, they'd probably make good gravel grinders. Higher end cross bikes are much more specialized and don't make as good all-arounders.

A cross bike only needs to be comfortable for an hour - not 6. It does not need fender mounts, rack mounts, or water bottle bosses. It's likely to be a bit more nimble than a gravel grinder, and lighter. Certainly it will be specced differently.

[GRAVELBIKE]

If you ride a bike on gravel, it's a gravel bike.

If you're buying a bike to ride on gravel, well, that's another story.

[GRAVELBIKE]

you could also ask this question about the difference between a CX/all-arounder, and a dedicated cyclocross racing bicycle.

A lot of low to mid-level cross bikes are designed to be multipurpose, and yeah, they'd probably make good gravel grinders. Higher end cross bikes are much more specialized and don't make as good all-arounders.

A cross bike only needs to be comfortable for an hour - not 6. It does not need fender mounts, rack mounts, or water bottle bosses. It's likely to be a bit more nimble than a gravel grinder, and lighter. Certainly it will be specced differently.

This. And comfort in CX is relative.

[David Kirk]

The lines between the different genres are thin and blurry at best and one can certainly use a bike meant for one genre in another and not go to hell or be uncool (despite what some might tell you).

A cross bike to me is a bike designed to be used for cross racing and it's fit and handling are optimized to that end......a higher BB to allow pedaling around super tight cross corners, a slightly shorter and higher bar position to aide in breathing and to shift more weight onto the drive wheel (since aero is less of a concern) and steering geometry that works at the lower speeds seen in cross racing as well as on off camber turns and a loose muddy surface.

A gravel bike is more of a road bike with room for larger tires. The BB doesn't need to be as high and the steering geometry is optimized for faster speeds seen on descents and a typically firmer surface than seen in cross. I like a gravel bike to have about the same reach as a road bike but with a bit less drop.

The cool thing is that you can cross (pun intended) over from one genre to another and while the bike might not be perfectly optimized for every use it can often be more than usable and fun.

If you get serious about one type of riding or another then it can make very good sense to get a bike designed with that type of riding in mind and it will really kick butt. But if you just enjoy riding what's in front of you on the bike you already have then that's perfect.

Have fun!


dave

[Grant McLean]

A gravel bike is more of a road bike with room for larger tires. The BB doesn't need to be as high and the steering geometry is optimized for faster speeds seen on descents and a typically firmer surface than seen in cross.



Something that may not be obvious to people looking at geometry charts
that list BB drop instead of BB height, is that larger tires 'lift' the bike.
So 38mm tires will raise the BB 1.5cm over 23mm tires. This is something
to take into account if someone plans on riding larger tires on a road bike
exclusively. It can add up to quite a difference to have all the details dialed in
for larger tires on a road bike.

-g

[David Kirk]

Something that may not be obvious to people looking at geometry charts
that list BB drop instead of BB height, is that larger tires 'lift' the bike.
So 38mm tires will raise the BB 1.5cm over 23mm tires. This is something
to take into account if someone plans on riding larger tires on a road bike
exclusively. It can add up to quite a difference to have all the details dialed in
for larger tires on a road bike.

-g

I agree.

dave

[ergott]

The lines between the different genres are thin and blurry at best and one can certainly use a bike meant for one genre in another and not go to hell or be uncool (despite what some might tell you).

A cross bike to me is a bike designed to be used for cross racing and it's fit and handling are optimized to that end......a higher BB to allow pedaling around super tight cross corners, a slightly shorter and higher bar position to aide in breathing and to shift more weight onto the drive wheel (since aero is less of a concern) and steering geometry that works at the lower speeds seen in cross racing as well as on off camber turns and a loose muddy surface.

A gravel bike is more of a road bike with room for larger tires. The BB doesn't need to be as high and the steering geometry is optimized for faster speeds seen on descents and a typically firmer surface than seen in cross. I like a gravel bike to have about the same reach as a road bike but with a bit less drop.

The cool thing is that you can cross (pun intended) over from one genre to another and while the bike might not be perfectly optimized for every use it can often be more than usable and fun.

If you get serious about one type of riding or another then it can make very good sense to get a bike designed with that type of riding in mind and it will really kick butt. But if you just enjoy riding what's in front of you on the bike you already have then that's perfect.

Have fun!


dave

I doubt anyone can say it better than this.

Thanks sir!

[John H.]

A bike does not need to be made or marketed as a gravel bike for it to be ridden on dirt.
A gravel bike needs:
1.) ability to fit the tires that you need for the terrain that you ride.
2.) it needs to ride right on the terrain that you ride.

I have a Crux- by marketing speak it is a world class cyclocross race bike. This bike kicks absolute **s as a mixed terrain bike. So predictable on the dirt, takes a 40mm tire, and even rides great on the road.
I do know that many cross bikes don't feel so good on a fast road descent or switchback. Not the case with my bike.

[cderalow]

Thats a CX bike?

above top tube routing of cables. mini-v's/cabtis... wide tires...

looks like cross to me.

[Uncle Jam's Army]

Is it really necessary to have a high BB height for CX purposes? For example, could you get away with a 7.5 cm BB drop in a cyclocross race? I think I read somewhere that BB's were getting lower on CX bikes.

I ask as a complete neophyte on all matters relating to CX, looking to do some cross races this fall.

[ergott]

There seems to be two camps on BB drop from cyclocross racing. There have been riders doing well with both so I think the answer is, it depends.

[John H.]

I think that you cannot consider bb height in isolation. It depends how the bb height works with the entire design.
I generally like road bikes with a bb drop of 75. My Crux has a bb drop of 69mm. The crux is very stable.
I love gravel and mixed terrain riding but I cant help but think that the marketers have gone wild in trying to create demand for new bikes when many good bikes for gravel already exist.

Is it really necessary to have a high BB height for CX purposes? For example, could you get away with a 7.5 cm BB drop in a cyclocross race? I think I read somewhere that BB's were getting lower on CX bikes.

I ask as a complete neophyte on all matters relating to CX, looking to do some cross races this fall.

[zennmotion]

Is it really necessary to have a high BB height for CX purposes? For example, could you get away with a 7.5 cm BB drop in a cyclocross race? I think I read somewhere that BB's were getting lower on CX bikes.

I ask as a complete neophyte on all matters relating to CX, looking to do some cross races this fall.

I would consider 7.5mm drop a little low but I wouldn't worry about it if the bike felt good and I liked it. Clipping pedals is not uncommon on cross courses, with offcamber sections and hairpin turns etc. Can be a little unsettling but seldom disastrous. More important is technique and handling, familiarity with your limits- it's a little different than on pavement with a road bike, more steering and upright, less leaning through turns. The only important considerations are tire clearance and appropriate gears. And color.

[ergott]

I raced on occasion with my Zanconato. It's got a 7cm drop and I never felt it to be too low. That bike handles so well.

[Mr.Bean]

If Tomac makes gravel bikes I might sell one of my CX bikes to buy one

[Hindmost]

One word: bottle bosses

[KidWok]

Similar to the difference between a track bike and a fixie...who is riding it and where/how it's being ridden.

Tai

[chiasticon]

Is it really necessary to have a high BB height for CX purposes? For example, could you get away with a 7.5 cm BB drop in a cyclocross race? I think I read somewhere that BB's were getting lower on CX bikes.viewpoints are splitting lately on this issue. but my understanding is that overall, higher BB's while traditional are currently more of a euro thing, where there's lots of off-cambers and you want that extra pedal clearance. however, in the states, there's not as much off camber stuff (because we race wherever they'll let us, not on purpose-designed courses) and the courses are overall a lot flatter with tighter space between the tape and slower turning, so you want that lower center of gravity. so the BB being lower makes sense. also, remounts are allegedly easier with a lower BB.

[FastforaSlowGuy]

One word: bottle bosses


This is a myth. Plenty of top flight pure bred CX bikes have 'em.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Vientomas]

One word: bottle bosses

That's two words. :banana:

[pbarry]

I raced on occasion with my Zanconato. It's got a 7cm drop and I never felt it to be too low. That bike handles so well.

^^ Yep. Mike knows.

Poprads were in that ballpark since inception. Ridley and one or two others continue to build higher, but the trend is downward.

[Dave Ferris]

What I'd give to have extended roads /paths of gravel/dirt or "mixed surface" to ride one on here in LA.

For most people older like me that I know, it's either road or mountain. I do see younger 20/30 somethings on a crossbike on the fireroads and trails in the Santa Monicas or San Gabriels occasionally. Rarely if ever have spotted one in the Verdugo Mtns. where I do 90% my mtn. riding.

When I do spot one I think -man pretty hardcore being things are so rutted from the extended drought. My 61 year old arthritic neck could never take that.

Many times as it is, I'm somewhat wishing I'd gone the Moots YBB soft tail route over 29er HT to smooth things out. That's mostly if I try and ride off road more then 3 days in a row.

Still never have been on a CX or gravel grinder bike in my life. Sounds like fun even if just ridden on the road.

[pbarry]

viewpoints are splitting lately on this issue. but my understanding is that overall, higher BB's while traditional are currently more of a euro thing, where there's lots of off-cambers and you want that extra pedal clearance. however, in the states, there's not as much off camber stuff (because we race wherever they'll let us, not on purpose-designed courses) and the courses are overall a lot flatter with tighter space between the tape and slower turning, so you want that lower center of gravity. so the BB being lower makes sense. also, remounts are allegedly easier with a lower BB.

Pretty much what you said. Remounts only slightly easier with lower BB if your frame has a level TT.

[pbarry]

What I'd give to have extended roads /paths of gravel/dirt or "mixed surface" to ride one on here in LA.

For most people older like me that I know, it's either road or mountain. I do see younger 20/30 somethings on a crossbike on the fireroads and trails in the Santa Monicas or San Gabriels occasionally. Rarely if ever have spotted one in the Verdugo Mtns. where I do 90% my mtn. riding.

When I do spot one I think -man pretty hardcore being things are so rutted from the extended drought. My 61 year old arthritic neck could never take that.

Many times as it is, I'm somewhat wishing I'd gone the Moots YBB soft tail route over 29er HT to smooth things out. That's mostly if I try and ride off road more then 3 days in a row.

Still never have been on a CX or gravel grinder bike in my life. Sounds like fun even if just ridden on the road.

Iirc, you've been riding for a long time, and you might have ridden where you were not supposed to go on a road bike. If so, you've been on a "gravel" bike. :beer:

[ergott]

Pretty much what you said. Remounts only slightly easier with lower BB if your frame has a level TT.

Only if the seattube measurements are different. 54cm C-C seattube doesn't depend BB drop. The frame just sits lower with respect to the wheels.

[Keith A]

Nothing to add to the discussion, but this was a question I had myself and I appreciate all of the information.

[brando]

I would consider 7.5mm drop a little low but I wouldn't worry about it if the bike felt good and I liked it. Clipping pedals is not uncommon on cross courses, with offcamber sections and hairpin turns etc. Can be a little unsettling but seldom disastrous. More important is technique and handling, familiarity with your limits- it's a little different than on pavement with a road bike, more steering and upright, less leaning through turns. The only important considerations are tire clearance and appropriate gears. And color.

“I like to put it just about the same as a road bike, between 70 and 73 millimeters. I get very few negative comments and many, many positive comments. People don’t have toe clips on their pedals anymore. They don’t need a 12 inch bottom bracket on a cyclocross bike. Anyone who says they do, I don’t know, they are just hurting themselves. They get a scarier riding, inferior mountain bike.”

-Paul Sadoff

[rides2slow]

The lines between the different genres are thin and blurry at best and one can certainly use a bike meant for one genre in another and not go to hell or be uncool (despite what some might tell you).

A cross bike to me is a bike designed to be used for cross racing and it's fit and handling are optimized to that end......a higher BB to allow pedaling around super tight cross corners, a slightly shorter and higher bar position to aide in breathing and to shift more weight onto the drive wheel (since aero is less of a concern) and steering geometry that works at the lower speeds seen in cross racing as well as on off camber turns and a loose muddy surface.

A gravel bike is more of a road bike with room for larger tires. The BB doesn't need to be as high and the steering geometry is optimized for faster speeds seen on descents and a typically firmer surface than seen in cross. I like a gravel bike to have about the same reach as a road bike but with a bit less drop.




The cool thing is that you can cross (pun intended) over from one genre to another and while the bike might not be perfectly optimized for every use it can often be more than usable and fun.

If you get serious about one type of riding or another then it can make very good sense to get a bike designed with that type of riding in mind and it will really kick butt. But if you just enjoy riding what's in front of you on the bike you already have then that's perfect.

Have fun!


dave


Thanks. This was helpful.

[pbarry]

Only if the seattube measurements are different. 54cm C-C seattube doesn't depend BB drop. The frame just sits lower with respect to the wheels.

Exactly! ;)

ST measurements can be the same, but stand over is different between a high BB and low BB bike, all else being equal. Sloping top tubes further confuse the issue as a tall head tube, with a 1-2 degree down angle will still offer a stand over height somewhere in between two frame sizes.

OTOH, a "compact" frame design, with a slope of 3 degrees or more, will provide added clearance from ground level.

One can swing their leg over more easily/miss hitting your stuff, while re-mounting on a low BB/high drop #, level top tube frame. The saddle height relative to grade is lower with a lower BB measurement/higher drop measurement frame.

[tigoat]

Exactly! ;)

ST measurements can be the same, but stand over is different between a high BB and low BB bike, all else being equal.

That is not necessary true. I have a bike with a 50mm BB drop and another bike with a 70mm BB drop and both bikes have the stand over height.

[oldpotatoe]

For the consumer, a lot of what you mention is more than marketing

Kind of restating what you said. Cross bikes certainly can make great gravel bikes. Road bikes with sufficient clearance can do the same. I wanted something with relaxed geo, low BB, longish wheelbase, and big tire clearance when I was researching and purchasing my all arounder/Gravelbike. I wouldn't own both and since I will never race a CX race, I was more drawn to the attributes/nuances of a gravelbike.

On a lot of 'cross' bikes, it is a matter of labeling. A Gunnar "CrossHairs" is a good example. Could you 'race' cyclocross with it? Sure but it's more of an allrounder, do anything, light tour/gravel/dirt/commute/road ride, type bike.

When marketing 'gravel grinders', it may have geometry differences but the bike that is truly 'different' in geometry are those that are designed to actually RACE cross and nothing much more. The rest are more all rounders, with places for racks and fenders and disc brake options.

[dawgie]

A lot touring bikes would make great "gravel grinders" as well, probably better than many CX bikes designed for racing. My Soma Saga has clearance for tires as large or 40 mm or more and handles/rides great on unpaved roads and trails. It rides so nice offroad that I'm tempted to sell my CX bike.

[pbarry]

That is not necessary true. I have a bike with a 50mm BB drop and another bike with a 70mm BB drop and both bikes have the stand over height.

[Emphasis added] Did you mean to write "equal" after "the"? IF both frames have the same front triangle geometry: ST length/angle and HT length/angle, same TT angle, same TT length, same fork A-C measurement, then we can further explore this mystery.

Standover remains constant with the same tires on both hypothetical bikes with a 7/8ths inch disparity in drop?? Please show me the measurements. :)

[SpeedyChix]

Difference for me is handling and expected performance. Gravel will relax the road geo a bit and offer more tire clearance. Use medium/long reach brakeset for larger tires. BB perhaps a bit lower than road. Add a bit to the chainstays. Predictable handling, superb sweeping cornering, confident in contact, yet spirited ride.

CX is going to be quicker handling and ability to clean successive tight u-turns. Fast gravel descents or loose sweepers require more attention than the gravel bike.

How specifically the frame was designed for CX really can make the difference between the two. Touring bikes/gravel bikes would/should/could share more dna than CX.

[ergott]

Exactly! ;)


Sorry, didn't review my post very well before clicking the Reply button.

[fourflys]

here's .02 that isn't really worth that but since I LOVE cross bikes...

unless you're an elite level cross racer or Tim Ek doing the Dirty Kanza, racing a "gravel bike" in a cross race probably won't be the thing that is limiting you... and racing a "cross bike" in a gravel race might be a bit more of a disadvantage as Dave Kirk pointed out (aero, BB, etc), I know it would be the difference between me ending up on the podium or not (I wouldn't be near the podium)...

If I had to pick one, I'd pick the gravel bike as Dave described it as I could do just about ANYTHING on that bike... if you want to look at the specs of a specially designed gravel bike, check out the Salsa Warbird as I understand Tim Ek and Jay P. had a lot of input on that design and gravel grinders are what they do...

http://salsacycles.com/bikes/warbird

[Gummee]

On a lot of 'cross' bikes, it is a matter of labeling. A Gunnar "CrossHairs" is a good example. Could you 'race' cyclocross with it? Sure but it's more of an allrounder, do anything, light tour/gravel/dirt/commute/road ride, type bike.

When marketing 'gravel grinders', it may have geometry differences but the bike that is truly 'different' in geometry are those that are designed to actually RACE cross and nothing much more. The rest are more all rounders, with places for racks and fenders and disc brake options.

My Crosshairs can race, but you can tell it isn't happy doing it. Otherwise, its a fantastic bike.

Now, the Altamira and FN CX bikes ARE race bikes. Neither one had a good season 'cause the engine sucked out loud this year. :cry

M

[fourflys]

My Crosshairs can race, but you can tell it isn't happy doing it. Otherwise, its a fantastic bike.

Now, the Altamira and FN CX bikes ARE race bikes. Neither one had a good season 'cause the engine sucked out loud this year. :cry

M

I can't wait to try out my carbon Hakalugi in some cross races after I move... I also really liked the Gin and Trombones I had when I was in SoCal... very quick bike

[sailorboy]

I raced on occasion with my Zanconato; but I should race it every weekend. It's got a 7cm drop and I never felt it to be too low. That bike handles so well.

fixed it for you! ;)

[John H.]

I just rode my Crux on a loop that had 7600 feet of climbing (also means that there was a lot of descending).
Never once did I think "I should have a gravel bike".
If the bike rides right, it rides right.

[mrogulja]

Modern CX bikes have a slightly different geometry than CX bikes of 10 years ago. Most of them have lowered BB by 1cm and slacked the top tube to increase handling at low speeds.

Additional benefit of that change is that bikes feel more akin to road bikes when fitted with road tires.

In essence, top of the line CX bike is very close to a climbing bike, with additional 1 inch wheelbase.
If one is going to spend good money on a modern CX bike, there is no need to buy a gravel bike.

[oldpotatoe]

Modern CX bikes have a slightly different geometry than CX bikes of 10 years ago. Most of them have lowered BB by 1cm and slacked the top tube to increase handling at low speeds.

Additional benefit of that change is that bikes feel more akin to road bikes when fitted with road tires.

In essence, top of the line CX bike is very close to a climbing bike, with additional 1 inch wheelbase.
If one is going to spend good money on a modern CX bike, there is no need to buy a gravel bike.

BUT few to none, real 'cross'/race type bikes don't have those things that many who ride 'gravel' may want. Fenders, eyelets for racks and more clearance than the UCI mandated 32mm tires.

[weisan]

BUT few to none, real 'cross'/race type bikes don't have those things that many who ride 'gravel' may want. Fenders, eyelets for racks and more clearance than the UCI mandated 32mm tires.

No eyelets on my Merlin but nothing that can't be solved with a few simple tools:


http://alicehui.com/pics/Merlin/drill.jpg

+

http://alicehui.com/pics/Merlin/humble-zip-tie.jpg

Result: Voila!
http://alicehui.com/pics/Merlin/m5.jpg

Fender + 45mm Resist Nomad installed in front with plenty of room left between the Winwood fork.
http://alicehui.com/pics/Merlin/m4.jpg
http://alicehui.com/pics/Merlin/m7.jpg

The rear on the hand is approaching its limit with fender and 35mm Pasela, can probably go up to 38 and that's more than enough for me.
http://alicehui.com/pics/Merlin/m2.jpg
http://alicehui.com/pics/Merlin/m3.jpg

Sweet ride!