Why many gravel bikes have a more traditional geometry with little seatpost showing?

[cyan]

It seems many gravel bikes (e.g. open up/upper, ibis hakka mx, cervelo aspero, and even custom builders like mosaic, baum, etc.) have a more traditional geometry with longer seat tube and little seatpost showing (unless you have longer-than-average legs)? For cross bikes, I understand the more traditional geometry makes carrying the bike on rider's shoulder easier, but gravel bikes?

Is there a functional reason or just aesthetics?

[nmrt]

from what i gather, sloping TT only came about with the giant-spesh-trek wanted to minimize sizing and save cost. this way they could make fewer sizes with sloping TT and get the standover height.

when you are making a custom bike the above point does not matter. And hence, i feel, the sloping TT or horizontal TT, becomes a matter of aesthetic perspective for the builder and the buyer.

having said that, tom kellogg, had something to say about the functionality of sloping Vs horizontal TT on a compact versus traditional frame (taken from https://www.spectrum-cycles.com/geometry.php)

Originally Posted by cyan

It seems many gravel bikes (e.g. open up/upper, ibis hakka mx, cervelo aspero, and even custom builders like mosaic, baum, etc.) have a more traditional geometry with longer seat tube and little seatpost showing (unless you have longer-than-average legs)? For cross bikes, I understand the compact geometry makes carrying the bike on rider's shoulder easier, but gravel bikes?

Is there a functional reason or just aesthetics?

[Ed-B]

Originally Posted by cyan

It seems many gravel bikes (e.g. open up/upper, ibis hakka mx, cervelo aspero, and even custom builders like mosaic, baum, etc.) have a more traditional geometry with longer seat tube and little seatpost showing (unless you have longer-than-average legs)? For cross bikes, I understand the compact geometry makes carrying the bike on rider's shoulder easier, but gravel bikes?

Is there a functional reason or just aesthetics?

I can't say that my observations agree with yours, including the cyclocross bike part, where a frame with compact geometry is actually more difficult to shoulder due to lack of room in the main triangle.

But I would offer that a longer seat tube and larger open area in the main triangle makes more space for frame bags, especially a voluminous top tube bag.

[Hellgate]

Originally Posted by cyan

It seems many gravel bikes (e.g. open up/upper, ibis hakka mx, cervelo aspero, and even custom builders like mosaic, baum, etc.) have a more traditional geometry with longer seat tube and little seatpost showing (unless you have longer-than-average legs)? For cross bikes, I understand the compact geometry makes carrying the bike on rider's shoulder easier, but gravel bikes?



Is there a functional reason or just aesthetics?

Compact CX frames are a bad idea.

[FlashUNC]

Room for bags yo.

[wallymann]

Originally Posted by cyan

Is there a functional reason or just aesthetics?

more room inside the main-triangle for bikepacking storage.

[9tubes]

Originally Posted by cyan

It seems many gravel bikes (e.g. open up/upper, ibis hakka mx, cervelo aspero, and even custom builders like mosaic, baum, etc.) have a more traditional geometry with longer seat tube and little seatpost showing (unless you have longer-than-average legs)? For cross bikes, I understand the compact geometry makes carrying the bike on rider's shoulder easier, but gravel bikes?

Is there a functional reason or just aesthetics?

I would guess that at least part of the reason is that the modern concept of gravel bikes pretty much started with a few custom builders like Hampsten, and this was more than 15 years ago. Traditional level top tubes were more common back then and the early gravel riders were long-time experts (like Andy Hampsten) who thought of level top tubes as the default design. I can't say for sure but maybe one of the early builders can chime in.

[Jaybee]

Like many others said above, it’s room for bags. I kinda wish mine had a lower top tube. I bang my knees quite a bit when working the bike on single track.

[HTupolev]

Originally Posted by cyan

It seems many gravel bikes (e.g. open up/upper, ibis hakka mx, cervelo aspero, and even custom builders like mosaic, baum, etc.) have a more traditional geometry with longer seat tube and little seatpost showing (unless you have longer-than-average legs)? For cross bikes, I understand the compact geometry makes carrying the bike on rider's shoulder easier, but gravel bikes?

Is there a functional reason or just aesthetics?

Never assume that there's a solid reason behind frame design choices.

But in this case...
1-Sometimes gravel bikes need to be carried, and sometimes gravel bikes get used as CX bikes.
2-Room for frame bags.

[hobbanero]

Most likely it is that gravel bikes derived from cx bikes. The frame bag argument makes sense, but a counter argument in favor of compact style is having more room for a dropper (those are a thing in gravel now) or at least more post showing to give you the option of softening up the ride with your choice of post.

On my gravel bike I have switched back and forth between a short dropper and a Canyon VCLS post. Both are big improvements...probably going to get the PNW post that is both suspension and dropper in one, which just has enough room to fit on my Diverge.

[Spdntrxi]

Originally Posted by hobbanero

Most likely it is that gravel bikes derived from cx bikes. The frame bag argument makes sense, but a counter argument in favor of compact style is having more room for a dropper (those are a thing in gravel now) or at least more post showing to give you the option of softening up the ride with your choice of post.

On my gravel bike I have switched back and forth between a short dropper and a Canyon VCLS post. Both are big improvements...probably going to get the PNW post that is both suspension and dropper in one, which just has enough room to fit on my Diverge.

Ive had my dropper for about 6 months now.. maybe more. F"n game changer where I ride. No joke.

I will never buy a gravel bike again unless I have enough room for a dropper. And those things can be pretty tall. Easily 6+ inches coming out of the seat tube.

[Louis]

I know essentially nothing about gravel bikes, so help me out here.

What's the benefit of a dropper post on a gravel bike? I sort of get it for MTB's, when you're doing all sorts of gnarly stuff and want to move your CG all over the place. Same story on gravel? (around here gravel roads are just "normal" roads that aren't paved, not stuff that would IMO require as much moving about as an MTB course, but then again, I don't ride gravel, except for rails-to-trails stuff that's very flat and not technical)

[unterhausen]

In Central Pennsylvania, gravel roads often feature 20% slopes. And big rocks.

[cyan]

Originally Posted by Ed-B

I can't say that my observations agree with yours, including the cyclocross bike part, where a frame with compact geometry is actually more difficult to shoulder due to lack of room in the main triangle.

But I would offer that a longer seat tube and larger open area in the main triangle makes more space for frame bags, especially a voluminous top tube bag.

Sorry, the cyclocross part was a typo. I meant to say the more traditional kind with horizontal top tube makes it easier for carry on shoulder. Corrected now

[cyan]

Originally Posted by nmrt

having said that, tom kellogg, had something to say about the functionality of sloping Vs horizontal TT on a compact versus traditional frame (taken from https://www.spectrum-cycles.com/geometry.php)

Good info! Thanks.