| |
Main
Date: 09 Nov 2007 06:29:03
From:
Subject: First cyclocross race - race my mtn bike or touring bike?
|
I'm racing in my first cyclocross race (Cat 4) this weekend and have a
question about wheel size/tire choice. I had been planning on racing
on my mountain bike (XT and XTR components) with the fork locked out
with 26" wheels with Kenda Klimax tires which are very light weight
(350g) and have a low rolling resistance and much smaller tread than a
normal mountain bike tire. It looks similar to a cross tire but
larger in size. They are between a 1.75" and 1.9". I'm wondering if
I can pump these up higher than people on dedicated cross bikes and if
I'd get the same ride/speed as someone on a thinner tire at lower
pressure. Would higher pressure on a mountain bike sized tire be
detrimental at all on a cross course? I know riding on a technical XC
course higher pressures are to be avoided. Or would it be worth it to
run it at 40 psi or so so I could just roll through the sand and mud
easier and hook up easier on uphills and downhills?
My other alternative for this weekend is to race my touring bike. It
has cantilever brakes, drop bars, and STI shifters. I don't have
cross tires for it yet but I could pick some up this evening. The
bike is fairly heavy at about 26lbs (its a steel touring frame with
lower end components - Tiagra/Deore) so it weighs about the same as my
mountain bike.
Which bike/wheel/tire choice do you think would be the fastest? I
watched some videos of a Cat 4 race on the course that I'm racing
(Beacon Cross in NJ) and notice that people were going pretty slow
down a pretty steep hill and either dismounting or going slow through
the sand pits. I'm thinking a mountain bike would have an advantage
here although the bigger tires could be slower depending on the
pressure I run them on the flats and roads. The gearing on both of my
bikes would allow me to ride up pretty much any hill. Is it faster to
dismount and run up some hills?
What are your opinions?
|
|
| |
Date: 15 Nov 2007 19:30:29
From:
Subject: Re: First cyclocross race - race my mtn bike or touring bike?
|
On Nov 15, 8:40 pm, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com > wrote:
> <fleshpi...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:f357b13d-90c7-48e2-857c-c7b8d78b6f40@b15g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > Well, here's an update on my weekend of racing. I raced both races
> > (Beacon and HPCX in NJ) on my mountain bike and got top 15 both times
> > (out of 45 and 70 respectively) so I'm fairly content for my placings
> > for my first cross racing experience.
>
> > Beacon was mainly along hard pack dirt trails so I kept my pressure
> > around 50 or 55 psi. My mountain bike (an '03 Specialized Epic) is
> > unshoulderable so I'm not sure if that fatigued me more than
> > shouldering a true cross bike running through a beach area and up an
> > amphitheater's steps. Either way, the running part drained me. I
> > weigh about 190 or so and haven't been running in a while so I
> > wouldn't say stairs are my strong point. There were only one or two
> > other instances going up hills where I had to dismount and I just
> > pushed it along the ground and let the wheels take the weight up the
> > bike. After the race I noticed that some of the riders in the upper
> > categories were retaining more speed through the sand pit than me - I
> > probably dropped from 20+mph to about 3 or 4mph at the end. I'm not
> > sure what the cause of that is - whether it's my tire size, pressure,
> > or strength - I'm a very big guy that can make a decent amount of
> > power so I'm guessing it's the tire width.
>
> > At the Highland Park CX Race I brought both my bikes with my touring
> > bike equipped with a pair of borrowed clincher cyclocross wheels with
> > knobby tires. I took both bikes out for a test ride of the course
> > and I felt faster on my mountain bike so I raced that. Both sets of
> > tires were around 50psi. I didn't want to pinch flat the true cross
> > wheels so that's why I had them that high. I ran the MTB tires
> > hihger pressure as I figured there was enough tread and width to deal
> > with any sort of traction requiremetns so I might as well minimize the
> > rolling resitance. Perhaps with tubulars on the cross wheels at a
> > lower pressure I would have felt faster - it just seemed so bumpy and
> > jarring at 50psi that I felt a lot slower. Who knows if I actually
> > was but my MTB felt much better and faster which I guess is what
> > really matters. I did notice that the touring bike seemed easier to
> > mount as I believe the BB height is lower than my FS Epic. However
> > during the heat of the race I didn't have any problems related to the
> > seat height relative to the ground. HPCX only had 1 set of obstacles
> > that had to be dismounted for unless you messed up a switchback or
> > slipped on the grass so the shoulder mounting was a non-issue. I
> > think the mountain bike did have a few advantages in some areas of the
> > course both days. There were some roots and a couple of deep ruts
> > that I was able to continue pedaling pretty much full speed while
> > other riders stood up to absorb some shock or tried to avoid them. It
> > also allowed me to pass people in more areas. I'm not sure if it was
> > because of the bike but I kept pedaling really hard down some of the
> > longer steeper downhill streches and was able to pass some people
> > while they more cruised down it or weren't pedaling quite as hard.
> > I'm not sure if the terrain was too bumpy at that high of speeds for
> > them to continue pedaling or if they were just recovering. My bike
> > ate any bumps up - "the Brain" rear shock automatically unlocks to
> > absorb any shocks and then locks back out again for a stable pedaling
> > platform. This allowed for a more forgiving and seemingly in control
> > bike.
>
> > I'm not sure if I answered my question to what bike/wheel/tire choice
> > is faster to my content but as of now I'll be racing my mountain
> > bike. Perhaps with tubulars on 700c wheels I might change my mind or
> > if I race on more courses like the Beacon course where the bike has to
> > get shouldered several times in a lap I might run my touring bike.
> > I'll try fooling around with tire pressure some more - perhaps I could
> > try running 60 to 80 psi on my MTB and see how that goes. I'm
> > guessing the rolling resistance would be much less than a tubular at
> > 30 or 35psi but still have the same amount of grip and roughly the
> > same amount of comfort. I guess when/if I move up into the UCI
> > categorie my decision will be made for me but that is still years off
> > probably. Either way, I'm definitely hooked on cross racing. It
> > combines the awesomeness of road and mountain bike racing into one
> > event. You can't beat it!
>
> Congratulations on your first race. I noted that you say you finished 15th
> and yet were going through the sand pit 3-4 mph near the end of the race. I
> would have expected that but I would have thought that the competition you
> were against weren't all beginners as well. I guess things are different out
> here in California where everyone's a sandbagger. Cat 3's with Cat 5
> licenses etc.
Sorry for the confusion - I meant I hit the beginning of the sand pit
around 20mph and at the end of the sand pit I was down to 3 or 4mph.
Now that I'm thinking about it, 3 or 4 miles an hour seems like it
might be a bit optimistic - it was probably closer to 1 or 2 mph as
the last 10 feet or so I was definitely going slower than walking pace
and struggled to make it the rest of the way through upright. I don't
think I could have stayed upright through the whole pit if I was going
3-4mph at the beginning of the pit! It seemed like some of the more
elite riders were probably going closer to jogging/running pace at the
end (7+mph perhaps?). Doing some reading online it seems like there
are two theories - thinner harder tires to cut through to the firmer
soil beneath or fat lower pressure tires that float on top. I had fat
higher pressure tires so that might have been the reason for my slow
going. Not all the riders on true cross bikes were able to make it
through the sand pit so I'm not quite sure what the optimal approach
is. High entry speeds definitely helps as you retain enough speed to
get most of the way through the pit while still going in a (fairly)
straight line and remaining (fairly) upright. I was hammering it at
the end when I slowed down a lot but I'm not sure if that was
propelling me any faster than a faster, smoother cadence in a lower
gear - perhaps the tires would hook up better without just throwing up
a rooster tail of sand with soft pedaling. Again, I'm not quite sure
about the tire width/pressure theory regarding mud/sand but my choice
definitely seemed fine for the rest of the race - I was just as fast
as the other riders on the road and trail. Perhaps I need to do some
time trials on a local course to see the time difference from
different setups. That's probably the only accurate way to judge the
effectiveness of the different choices.
|
| | |
Date: 15 Nov 2007 19:56:12
From: Tom Kunich
Subject: Re: First cyclocross race - race my mtn bike or touring bike?
|
<fleshpie.l@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:90a36382-873f-4408-9aad-b18b50033f54@l1g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
>
> Sorry for the confusion - I meant I hit the beginning of the sand pit
> around 20mph and at the end of the sand pit I was down to 3 or 4mph.
Yeah, I understood that. But regardless of what you hear, if you stand to
the side and watch, everything works pretty much equally badly in that sort
of stuff. The reason that the fast guys are fast isn't because of equipment
but because of racing muscles. If you keep racing you'll gain those as well.
|
| |
Date: 15 Nov 2007 11:01:49
From:
Subject: Re: First cyclocross race - race my mtn bike or touring bike?
|
Well, here's an update on my weekend of racing. I raced both races
(Beacon and HPCX in NJ) on my mountain bike and got top 15 both times
(out of 45 and 70 respectively) so I'm fairly content for my placings
for my first cross racing experience.
Beacon was mainly along hard pack dirt trails so I kept my pressure
around 50 or 55 psi. My mountain bike (an '03 Specialized Epic) is
unshoulderable so I'm not sure if that fatigued me more than
shouldering a true cross bike running through a beach area and up an
amphitheater's steps. Either way, the running part drained me. I
weigh about 190 or so and haven't been running in a while so I
wouldn't say stairs are my strong point. There were only one or two
other instances going up hills where I had to dismount and I just
pushed it along the ground and let the wheels take the weight up the
bike. After the race I noticed that some of the riders in the upper
categories were retaining more speed through the sand pit than me - I
probably dropped from 20+mph to about 3 or 4mph at the end. I'm not
sure what the cause of that is - whether it's my tire size, pressure,
or strength - I'm a very big guy that can make a decent amount of
power so I'm guessing it's the tire width.
At the Highland Park CX Race I brought both my bikes with my touring
bike equipped with a pair of borrowed clincher cyclocross wheels with
knobby tires. I took both bikes out for a test ride of the course
and I felt faster on my mountain bike so I raced that. Both sets of
tires were around 50psi. I didn't want to pinch flat the true cross
wheels so that's why I had them that high. I ran the MTB tires
hihger pressure as I figured there was enough tread and width to deal
with any sort of traction requiremetns so I might as well minimize the
rolling resitance. Perhaps with tubulars on the cross wheels at a
lower pressure I would have felt faster - it just seemed so bumpy and
jarring at 50psi that I felt a lot slower. Who knows if I actually
was but my MTB felt much better and faster which I guess is what
really matters. I did notice that the touring bike seemed easier to
mount as I believe the BB height is lower than my FS Epic. However
during the heat of the race I didn't have any problems related to the
seat height relative to the ground. HPCX only had 1 set of obstacles
that had to be dismounted for unless you messed up a switchback or
slipped on the grass so the shoulder mounting was a non-issue. I
think the mountain bike did have a few advantages in some areas of the
course both days. There were some roots and a couple of deep ruts
that I was able to continue pedaling pretty much full speed while
other riders stood up to absorb some shock or tried to avoid them. It
also allowed me to pass people in more areas. I'm not sure if it was
because of the bike but I kept pedaling really hard down some of the
longer steeper downhill streches and was able to pass some people
while they more cruised down it or weren't pedaling quite as hard.
I'm not sure if the terrain was too bumpy at that high of speeds for
them to continue pedaling or if they were just recovering. My bike
ate any bumps up - "the Brain" rear shock automatically unlocks to
absorb any shocks and then locks back out again for a stable pedaling
platform. This allowed for a more forgiving and seemingly in control
bike.
I'm not sure if I answered my question to what bike/wheel/tire choice
is faster to my content but as of now I'll be racing my mountain
bike. Perhaps with tubulars on 700c wheels I might change my mind or
if I race on more courses like the Beacon course where the bike has to
get shouldered several times in a lap I might run my touring bike.
I'll try fooling around with tire pressure some more - perhaps I could
try running 60 to 80 psi on my MTB and see how that goes. I'm
guessing the rolling resistance would be much less than a tubular at
30 or 35psi but still have the same amount of grip and roughly the
same amount of comfort. I guess when/if I move up into the UCI
categorie my decision will be made for me but that is still years off
probably. Either way, I'm definitely hooked on cross racing. It
combines the awesomeness of road and mountain bike racing into one
event. You can't beat it!
|
| | |
Date: 15 Nov 2007 17:40:37
From: Tom Kunich
Subject: Re: First cyclocross race - race my mtn bike or touring bike?
|
<fleshpie.l@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:f357b13d-90c7-48e2-857c-c7b8d78b6f40@b15g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
> Well, here's an update on my weekend of racing. I raced both races
> (Beacon and HPCX in NJ) on my mountain bike and got top 15 both times
> (out of 45 and 70 respectively) so I'm fairly content for my placings
> for my first cross racing experience.
>
> Beacon was mainly along hard pack dirt trails so I kept my pressure
> around 50 or 55 psi. My mountain bike (an '03 Specialized Epic) is
> unshoulderable so I'm not sure if that fatigued me more than
> shouldering a true cross bike running through a beach area and up an
> amphitheater's steps. Either way, the running part drained me. I
> weigh about 190 or so and haven't been running in a while so I
> wouldn't say stairs are my strong point. There were only one or two
> other instances going up hills where I had to dismount and I just
> pushed it along the ground and let the wheels take the weight up the
> bike. After the race I noticed that some of the riders in the upper
> categories were retaining more speed through the sand pit than me - I
> probably dropped from 20+mph to about 3 or 4mph at the end. I'm not
> sure what the cause of that is - whether it's my tire size, pressure,
> or strength - I'm a very big guy that can make a decent amount of
> power so I'm guessing it's the tire width.
>
> At the Highland Park CX Race I brought both my bikes with my touring
> bike equipped with a pair of borrowed clincher cyclocross wheels with
> knobby tires. I took both bikes out for a test ride of the course
> and I felt faster on my mountain bike so I raced that. Both sets of
> tires were around 50psi. I didn't want to pinch flat the true cross
> wheels so that's why I had them that high. I ran the MTB tires
> hihger pressure as I figured there was enough tread and width to deal
> with any sort of traction requiremetns so I might as well minimize the
> rolling resitance. Perhaps with tubulars on the cross wheels at a
> lower pressure I would have felt faster - it just seemed so bumpy and
> jarring at 50psi that I felt a lot slower. Who knows if I actually
> was but my MTB felt much better and faster which I guess is what
> really matters. I did notice that the touring bike seemed easier to
> mount as I believe the BB height is lower than my FS Epic. However
> during the heat of the race I didn't have any problems related to the
> seat height relative to the ground. HPCX only had 1 set of obstacles
> that had to be dismounted for unless you messed up a switchback or
> slipped on the grass so the shoulder mounting was a non-issue. I
> think the mountain bike did have a few advantages in some areas of the
> course both days. There were some roots and a couple of deep ruts
> that I was able to continue pedaling pretty much full speed while
> other riders stood up to absorb some shock or tried to avoid them. It
> also allowed me to pass people in more areas. I'm not sure if it was
> because of the bike but I kept pedaling really hard down some of the
> longer steeper downhill streches and was able to pass some people
> while they more cruised down it or weren't pedaling quite as hard.
> I'm not sure if the terrain was too bumpy at that high of speeds for
> them to continue pedaling or if they were just recovering. My bike
> ate any bumps up - "the Brain" rear shock automatically unlocks to
> absorb any shocks and then locks back out again for a stable pedaling
> platform. This allowed for a more forgiving and seemingly in control
> bike.
>
> I'm not sure if I answered my question to what bike/wheel/tire choice
> is faster to my content but as of now I'll be racing my mountain
> bike. Perhaps with tubulars on 700c wheels I might change my mind or
> if I race on more courses like the Beacon course where the bike has to
> get shouldered several times in a lap I might run my touring bike.
> I'll try fooling around with tire pressure some more - perhaps I could
> try running 60 to 80 psi on my MTB and see how that goes. I'm
> guessing the rolling resistance would be much less than a tubular at
> 30 or 35psi but still have the same amount of grip and roughly the
> same amount of comfort. I guess when/if I move up into the UCI
> categorie my decision will be made for me but that is still years off
> probably. Either way, I'm definitely hooked on cross racing. It
> combines the awesomeness of road and mountain bike racing into one
> event. You can't beat it!
Congratulations on your first race. I noted that you say you finished 15th
and yet were going through the sand pit 3-4 mph near the end of the race. I
would have expected that but I would have thought that the competition you
were against weren't all beginners as well. I guess things are different out
here in California where everyone's a sandbagger. Cat 3's with Cat 5
licenses etc.
|
| |
Date: 13 Nov 2007 06:44:23
From:
Subject: Re: First cyclocross race - race my mtn bike or touring bike?
|
On Nov 12, 7:46 am, cyclin...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> My world champion Atala cross bike has a LOWER than normal BB and then
> when you put cross tires on it the clearance moves up to the same as a
> normal road bike. Unfortunately it's a 62 cm bike so with cross tires
> on it I can't get a foot on the ground easily so I've converted it
> into a touring bike and it is admirable indeed.
I should add this - cyclocross bikes in general do not make good
touring bikes. They are built too lightly and get all wobbly under a
full load, they're generally shorter than a good touring bike and your
heels hit the pannier and often they have cables running over the top
of the toptube. On a touring bike you want to sit more upright and
have the bars about at the same height as the saddle. So you usually
have a larger touring bike than your normal road bike. If the cables
are running along the top of the top tube there are times when you
find yourself singing soprano.
On a tour where there are a lot of beginners, such as down the coast
of Californai, you'll see a lot of racing bikes being used. It is
usual for real touring bikes to ride quite a bit slower than these
bikes but to average significantly higher mileage per day because the
touring rider doesn't have to stop and rest his back and crotch etc.
Let me tell you, those Brooks B-17s really come into their own under
those conditions.
|
| |
Date: 12 Nov 2007 07:46:29
From:
Subject: Re: First cyclocross race - race my mtn bike or touring bike?
|
On Nov 10, 7:12 pm, "b...@mambo.ucolick.org" <b...@mambo.ucolick.org >
wrote:
>
> I have a high-BB bike and it's mildly annoying.
> The high BB and larger tires are one reason people
> often have trouble figuring out what size of CX bike
> to get, since the standover is bigger for a nominal
> size as measured by seat tube length.
That's why they used to suggest that you get a cross bike 2 cm smaller
than your normal road bike. The problem now is that most cross bikes
don't have a high BB since it makes the bike feel clumsy though it
doesn't really change anything. They still ride fine but they do
definitely feel top heavy.
My world champion Atala cross bike has a LOWER than normal BB and then
when you put cross tires on it the clearance moves up to the same as a
normal road bike. Unfortunately it's a 62 cm bike so with cross tires
on it I can't get a foot on the ground easily so I've converted it
into a touring bike and it is admirable indeed.
|
| |
Date: 11 Nov 2007 03:12:46
From: bjw@mambo.ucolick.org
Subject: Re: First cyclocross race - race my mtn bike or touring bike?
|
On Nov 9, 4:12 pm, Scott <hendricks_sc...@hotmail.com > wrote:
>
> Why, other than habit, is a low BB contra-indicated for a 'cross
> bike? I know that the Euro guys don't like low BB,but I wonder why?
>
> I recently switched from a 'traditional' cross frame (Redline Team) to
> a Lemond Poprad with a BB 3/4" lower than the Redline and in fact
> lower than any other production 'cross bike.
>
> It handles sooo much better and is a tad bit easier to remount due to
> the slightly lower saddle height. I can't imagine, unlike in
> mountainbiking, that I need to worry about striking a pedal, so I
> can't imagine a scenario where the lower BB would be a detriment.
>
> I won't say 'never', but I can't imagine switching back to a
> traditional, high BB cross bike.
I can't come up with any reason other than tradition.
I think Adam Myerson and some of the vets I knew
pointed out that the old reason had to do with dragging
your toeclips. Of course that hasn't been an issue
for a long time. The Euros don't tend to ride on rocky
or MTB-like courses so you wouldn't think they'd strike
pedals. Simon Burney's book advocates higher BBs for
pedal clearance though, so somebody over there thinks
it's an issue.
I have a high-BB bike and it's mildly annoying.
The high BB and larger tires are one reason people
often have trouble figuring out what size of CX bike
to get, since the standover is bigger for a nominal
size as measured by seat tube length.
Ben
|
| |
Date: 09 Nov 2007 21:16:23
From: Scott
Subject: Re: First cyclocross race - race my mtn bike or touring bike?
|
On Nov 9, 5:01 pm, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com > wrote:
> "Scott" <hendricks_sc...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1194649920.219285.59890@o3g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > Why, other than habit, is a low BB contra-indicated for a 'cross
> > bike? I know that the Euro guys don't like low BB,but I wonder why?
>
> > I recently switched from a 'traditional' cross frame (Redline Team) to
> > a Lemond Poprad with a BB 3/4" lower than the Redline and in fact
> > lower than any other production 'cross bike.
>
> > It handles sooo much better and is a tad bit easier to remount due to
> > the slightly lower saddle height. I can't imagine, unlike in
> > mountainbiking, that I need to worry about striking a pedal, so I
> > can't imagine a scenario where the lower BB would be a detriment.
>
> > I won't say 'never', but I can't imagine switching back to a
> > traditional, high BB cross bike.
>
> Scott, you're not alone. This is the chief reason that Redline is having so
> much profit/loss problems these days. They're too stupid to understand where
> they're making a mistake.
I'm not so sure I'd presume to know what their profit issues are due
to, assuming they're even having issues. Around here (aka: CO) you
can't swing a dead cat without hitting someone on a Redline cross
bike. While I may not like their penchant for high BBs, apparently
lot's of other folks aren't so bothered by it. Prior to trying a
Poprad for one race last season, I didn't mind the high BB either. It
wasn't until I'd ridden something with a much lower BB that I changed
my mind regarding geometry preferences. It should be noted that
otherwise, the Redline and Lemond geometries are identical. I'm just .
75 inches closer to the ground on the Poprad, and even given that the
bike weighs just a tad less than a half pound more, I like it better.
In the spirit of full disclosure, I have to also admit I prefer steel
to aluminum (even scandium) and really like frames made from the OX
Platinum tubeset.
|
| | |
Date: 10 Nov 2007 15:17:06
From: Tom Kunich
Subject: Re: First cyclocross race - race my mtn bike or touring bike?
|
"Scott" <hendricks_scott@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:1194671783.701775.131920@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com...
> On Nov 9, 5:01 pm, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
>> "Scott" <hendricks_sc...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:1194649920.219285.59890@o3g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>
>>
>> > Why, other than habit, is a low BB contra-indicated for a 'cross
>> > bike? I know that the Euro guys don't like low BB,but I wonder why?
>>
>> > I recently switched from a 'traditional' cross frame (Redline Team) to
>> > a Lemond Poprad with a BB 3/4" lower than the Redline and in fact
>> > lower than any other production 'cross bike.
>>
>> > It handles sooo much better and is a tad bit easier to remount due to
>> > the slightly lower saddle height. I can't imagine, unlike in
>> > mountainbiking, that I need to worry about striking a pedal, so I
>> > can't imagine a scenario where the lower BB would be a detriment.
>>
>> > I won't say 'never', but I can't imagine switching back to a
>> > traditional, high BB cross bike.
>>
>> Scott, you're not alone. This is the chief reason that Redline is having
>> so
>> much profit/loss problems these days. They're too stupid to understand
>> where
>> they're making a mistake.
>
> I'm not so sure I'd presume to know what their profit issues are due
> to, assuming they're even having issues. Around here (aka: CO) you
> can't swing a dead cat without hitting someone on a Redline cross
> bike. While I may not like their penchant for high BBs, apparently
> lot's of other folks aren't so bothered by it. Prior to trying a
> Poprad for one race last season, I didn't mind the high BB either. It
> wasn't until I'd ridden something with a much lower BB that I changed
> my mind regarding geometry preferences. It should be noted that
> otherwise, the Redline and Lemond geometries are identical. I'm just .
> 75 inches closer to the ground on the Poprad, and even given that the
> bike weighs just a tad less than a half pound more, I like it better.
> In the spirit of full disclosure, I have to also admit I prefer steel
> to aluminum (even scandium) and really like frames made from the OX
> Platinum tubeset.
I've tried Gitane, Redline, Guerciotti (now that is a GREAT Cross bike - too
bad it was too small for me), Pinarello (again a great cross bike that's too
small though no one seems interested in it
http://classifieds.roadbikereview.com/showproduct.php?product=5528&cat=4),
Poprad - nice bike but was actually too big at 60 cm's and now a Raleigh
Team Cross which is an extremely nice cross bike that I completely recommend
to anyone.
The trouble with the Raleigh is that their weird measurement system makes it
very difficult to fit one unless you find a shop with a collection of them
to try. I bought a 59 cm which is marked 61 cm but which rides like my 60 cm
Poprad. I would have liked a real 58 or 59 cm but I'll make do with this one
because it is a VERY nice bike.
|
| |
Date: 10 Nov 2007 00:47:06
From: Ryan Cousineau
Subject: Re: First cyclocross race - race my mtn bike or touring bike?
|
On Nov 9, 12:41 pm, "b...@mambo.ucolick.org" <b...@mambo.ucolick.org >
wrote:
> On Nov 9, 11:55 am, Michael Press <rub...@pacbell.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > In article
> > <1194618543.567669.20...@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
>
> > fleshpi...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > I'm racing in my first cyclocross race (Cat 4) this weekend and have a
> > > question about wheel size/tire choice. I had been planning on racing
> > > on my mountain bike (XT and XTR components) with the fork locked out
> > > with 26" wheels with Kenda Klimax tires which are very light weight
> > > (350g) and have a low rolling resistance and much smaller tread than a
> > > normal mountain bike tire. It looks similar to a cross tire but
> > > larger in size. They are between a 1.75" and 1.9". I'm wondering if
> > > I can pump these up higher than people on dedicated cross bikes and if
> > > I'd get the same ride/speed as someone on a thinner tire at lower
> > > pressure. Would higher pressure on a mountain bike sized tire be
> > > detrimental at all on a cross course? I know riding on a technical XC
> > > course higher pressures are to be avoided. Or would it be worth it to
> > > run it at 40 psi or so so I could just roll through the sand and mud
> > > easier and hook up easier on uphills and downhills?
>
> > > My other alternative for this weekend is to race my touring bike. It
> > > has cantilever brakes, drop bars, and STI shifters. I don't have
> > > cross tires for it yet but I could pick some up this evening. The
> > > bike is fairly heavy at about 26lbs (its a steel touring frame with
> > > lower end components - Tiagra/Deore) so it weighs about the same as my
> > > mountain bike.
>
> > > Which bike/wheel/tire choice do you think would be the fastest? I
> > > watched some videos of a Cat 4 race on the course that I'm racing
> > > (Beacon Cross in NJ) and notice that people were going pretty slow
> > > down a pretty steep hill and either dismounting or going slow through
> > > the sand pits. I'm thinking a mountain bike would have an advantage
> > > here although the bigger tires could be slower depending on the
> > > pressure I run them on the flats and roads. The gearing on both of my
> > > bikes would allow me to ride up pretty much any hill. Is it faster to
> > > dismount and run up some hills?
>
> rbt won't help; they don't know which one will be faster.
> Neither do we, since we don't know the course or the
> abilities of the rider, but at least in rbr we know that.
> The question of which one is faster depends on how technical
> the course is and which one the rider is more comfortable with.
> On a course with a lot of fast grass, dirt, or pavement sections,
> the MTB will generally suffer. However, you probably don't
> want or need to go much above 40 psi in the MTB tires.
> Crossers often run that in narrower cross tires.
> Finally, it doesn't really matter - unless you're really fit
> and used to repeated sprinting/surging efforts, your first
> cross race will be a sufferfest. Don't worry too much
> about the bike and have fun.
>
> Ben
Ben has some excellent advice for you. The only thing I care to add is
that while your tourer may have an under-top-tube brake cable routing,
most MTBs put three cables along the top of the top tube. The
consideration is ease of shouldering if there's a run-up or long
running section.
If these conditions apply, then go for the one with the better cable
routing.
If it was me, I'd use the MTB: you already have tires, and an XT/XTR
hardtail (?) is probably lighter than your tourer. Instead of giving
you a rationale, I'll dictate: run as low a pressure as you can
without bottoming out on the course (40 psi at most).
This recipe will sorta make your day really easy: you'll plow through
anything even remotely technical, but will probably not lose any time
versus riding your touring bike.
I say this as someone who has ridden cx races on everything from a
hardtail MTB to a road bike with hybrid tires mounted. Horses for
courses, and now I use a dedicated cx bike built around the slightly
goofy Nashbar "X" frame (sloping top tube, but it works).
|
| |
Date: 09 Nov 2007 15:12:00
From: Scott
Subject: Re: First cyclocross race - race my mtn bike or touring bike?
|
On Nov 9, 11:55 am, Michael Press <rub...@pacbell.net > wrote:
> In article
> <1194618543.567669.20...@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
>
>
>
>
>
> fleshpi...@gmail.com wrote:
> > I'm racing in my first cyclocross race (Cat 4) this weekend and have a
> > question about wheel size/tire choice. I had been planning on racing
> > on my mountain bike (XT and XTR components) with the fork locked out
> > with 26" wheels with Kenda Klimax tires which are very light weight
> > (350g) and have a low rolling resistance and much smaller tread than a
> > normal mountain bike tire. It looks similar to a cross tire but
> > larger in size. They are between a 1.75" and 1.9". I'm wondering if
> > I can pump these up higher than people on dedicated cross bikes and if
> > I'd get the same ride/speed as someone on a thinner tire at lower
> > pressure. Would higher pressure on a mountain bike sized tire be
> > detrimental at all on a cross course? I know riding on a technical XC
> > course higher pressures are to be avoided. Or would it be worth it to
> > run it at 40 psi or so so I could just roll through the sand and mud
> > easier and hook up easier on uphills and downhills?
>
> > My other alternative for this weekend is to race my touring bike. It
> > has cantilever brakes, drop bars, and STI shifters. I don't have
> > cross tires for it yet but I could pick some up this evening. The
> > bike is fairly heavy at about 26lbs (its a steel touring frame with
> > lower end components - Tiagra/Deore) so it weighs about the same as my
> > mountain bike.
>
> > Which bike/wheel/tire choice do you think would be the fastest? I
> > watched some videos of a Cat 4 race on the course that I'm racing
> > (Beacon Cross in NJ) and notice that people were going pretty slow
> > down a pretty steep hill and either dismounting or going slow through
> > the sand pits. I'm thinking a mountain bike would have an advantage
> > here although the bigger tires could be slower depending on the
> > pressure I run them on the flats and roads. The gearing on both of my
> > bikes would allow me to ride up pretty much any hill. Is it faster to
> > dismount and run up some hills?
>
> Try rec.bicycles.tech.
>
> Is the tourer a true touring frame? A true touring
> frame has a lower bottom bracket, and is contra-indicated
> for cyclocross. Low tire pressure is fine on many
> cyclocross courses.
>
> --
> Michael Press- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Why, other than habit, is a low BB contra-indicated for a 'cross
bike? I know that the Euro guys don't like low BB,but I wonder why?
I recently switched from a 'traditional' cross frame (Redline Team) to
a Lemond Poprad with a BB 3/4" lower than the Redline and in fact
lower than any other production 'cross bike.
It handles sooo much better and is a tad bit easier to remount due to
the slightly lower saddle height. I can't imagine, unlike in
mountainbiking, that I need to worry about striking a pedal, so I
can't imagine a scenario where the lower BB would be a detriment.
I won't say 'never', but I can't imagine switching back to a
traditional, high BB cross bike.
|
| | |
Date: 09 Nov 2007 16:01:36
From: Tom Kunich
Subject: Re: First cyclocross race - race my mtn bike or touring bike?
|
"Scott" <hendricks_scott@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:1194649920.219285.59890@o3g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>
> Why, other than habit, is a low BB contra-indicated for a 'cross
> bike? I know that the Euro guys don't like low BB,but I wonder why?
>
> I recently switched from a 'traditional' cross frame (Redline Team) to
> a Lemond Poprad with a BB 3/4" lower than the Redline and in fact
> lower than any other production 'cross bike.
>
> It handles sooo much better and is a tad bit easier to remount due to
> the slightly lower saddle height. I can't imagine, unlike in
> mountainbiking, that I need to worry about striking a pedal, so I
> can't imagine a scenario where the lower BB would be a detriment.
>
> I won't say 'never', but I can't imagine switching back to a
> traditional, high BB cross bike.
Scott, you're not alone. This is the chief reason that Redline is having so
much profit/loss problems these days. They're too stupid to understand where
they're making a mistake.
|
| |
Date: 09 Nov 2007 20:41:23
From: bjw@mambo.ucolick.org
Subject: Re: First cyclocross race - race my mtn bike or touring bike?
|
On Nov 9, 11:55 am, Michael Press <rub...@pacbell.net > wrote:
> In article
> <1194618543.567669.20...@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
>
>
>
> fleshpi...@gmail.com wrote:
> > I'm racing in my first cyclocross race (Cat 4) this weekend and have a
> > question about wheel size/tire choice. I had been planning on racing
> > on my mountain bike (XT and XTR components) with the fork locked out
> > with 26" wheels with Kenda Klimax tires which are very light weight
> > (350g) and have a low rolling resistance and much smaller tread than a
> > normal mountain bike tire. It looks similar to a cross tire but
> > larger in size. They are between a 1.75" and 1.9". I'm wondering if
> > I can pump these up higher than people on dedicated cross bikes and if
> > I'd get the same ride/speed as someone on a thinner tire at lower
> > pressure. Would higher pressure on a mountain bike sized tire be
> > detrimental at all on a cross course? I know riding on a technical XC
> > course higher pressures are to be avoided. Or would it be worth it to
> > run it at 40 psi or so so I could just roll through the sand and mud
> > easier and hook up easier on uphills and downhills?
>
> > My other alternative for this weekend is to race my touring bike. It
> > has cantilever brakes, drop bars, and STI shifters. I don't have
> > cross tires for it yet but I could pick some up this evening. The
> > bike is fairly heavy at about 26lbs (its a steel touring frame with
> > lower end components - Tiagra/Deore) so it weighs about the same as my
> > mountain bike.
>
> > Which bike/wheel/tire choice do you think would be the fastest? I
> > watched some videos of a Cat 4 race on the course that I'm racing
> > (Beacon Cross in NJ) and notice that people were going pretty slow
> > down a pretty steep hill and either dismounting or going slow through
> > the sand pits. I'm thinking a mountain bike would have an advantage
> > here although the bigger tires could be slower depending on the
> > pressure I run them on the flats and roads. The gearing on both of my
> > bikes would allow me to ride up pretty much any hill. Is it faster to
> > dismount and run up some hills?
>
> Try rec.bicycles.tech.
>
> Is the tourer a true touring frame? A true touring
> frame has a lower bottom bracket, and is contra-indicated
> for cyclocross. Low tire pressure is fine on many
> cyclocross courses.
rbt won't help; they don't know which one will be faster.
Neither do we, since we don't know the course or the
abilities of the rider, but at least in rbr we know that.
The low BB height doesn't really matter. Cyclocross bikes
used to have high BBs so that when you pedaled on the
backs of the pedals, your toe clips wouldn't foul the ground.
With clipless pedals this is no longer much of a concern.
The question of which one is faster depends on how technical
the course is and which one the rider is more comfortable with.
On a course with a lot of fast grass, dirt, or pavement sections,
the MTB will generally suffer. However, you probably don't
want or need to go much above 40 psi in the MTB tires.
Crossers often run that in narrower cross tires.
Cross tires/bikes are sometimes as good or better than
fat tires in squishy mud.
On steeper hills, it's generally faster to run up the hill
than ride in a low gear.
One factor to consider is shoulderability. Some MTBs
are more difficult to carry. Also the handlebar is harder
to grab with the right arm (assuming you're not one of those
lefty-shouldering enemies of freedom).
On either bike, if it has a triple, you might want to install
a chain watcher that keeps you from dropping chain to the
inside, or even blocks out the granny ring.
Finally, it doesn't really matter - unless you're really fit
and used to repeated sprinting/surging efforts, your first
cross race will be a sufferfest. Don't worry too much
about the bike and have fun.
Ben
|
| | |
Date: 09 Nov 2007 15:03:08
From: Tom Kunich
Subject: Re: First cyclocross race - race my mtn bike or touring bike?
|
<bjw@mambo.ucolick.org > wrote in message
news:1194640883.668650.274660@i38g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
> Finally, it doesn't really matter - unless you're really fit
> and used to repeated sprinting/surging efforts, your first
> cross race will be a sufferfest. Don't worry too much
> about the bike and have fun.
It is likely that you'll be lapped by the slowest other person on the second
lap. That's normal for a beginner.
MTB's with a sharply sloping TT are generally shouldered by holding the
front of the saddle in your right hand over the front of the saddle, holding
it on your right shoulder and holding the handlebars in your left hand. It
won't take many races like that to discover that you really want to buy a
REAL(tm) cyclocross bike.
|
| |
Date: 09 Nov 2007 18:55:24
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: First cyclocross race - race my mtn bike or touring bike?
|
In article
<1194618543.567669.20250@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com >,
fleshpie.l@gmail.com wrote:
> I'm racing in my first cyclocross race (Cat 4) this weekend and have a
> question about wheel size/tire choice. I had been planning on racing
> on my mountain bike (XT and XTR components) with the fork locked out
> with 26" wheels with Kenda Klimax tires which are very light weight
> (350g) and have a low rolling resistance and much smaller tread than a
> normal mountain bike tire. It looks similar to a cross tire but
> larger in size. They are between a 1.75" and 1.9". I'm wondering if
> I can pump these up higher than people on dedicated cross bikes and if
> I'd get the same ride/speed as someone on a thinner tire at lower
> pressure. Would higher pressure on a mountain bike sized tire be
> detrimental at all on a cross course? I know riding on a technical XC
> course higher pressures are to be avoided. Or would it be worth it to
> run it at 40 psi or so so I could just roll through the sand and mud
> easier and hook up easier on uphills and downhills?
>
> My other alternative for this weekend is to race my touring bike. It
> has cantilever brakes, drop bars, and STI shifters. I don't have
> cross tires for it yet but I could pick some up this evening. The
> bike is fairly heavy at about 26lbs (its a steel touring frame with
> lower end components - Tiagra/Deore) so it weighs about the same as my
> mountain bike.
>
> Which bike/wheel/tire choice do you think would be the fastest? I
> watched some videos of a Cat 4 race on the course that I'm racing
> (Beacon Cross in NJ) and notice that people were going pretty slow
> down a pretty steep hill and either dismounting or going slow through
> the sand pits. I'm thinking a mountain bike would have an advantage
> here although the bigger tires could be slower depending on the
> pressure I run them on the flats and roads. The gearing on both of my
> bikes would allow me to ride up pretty much any hill. Is it faster to
> dismount and run up some hills?
Try rec.bicycles.tech.
Is the tourer a true touring frame? A true touring
frame has a lower bottom bracket, and is contra-indicated
for cyclocross. Low tire pressure is fine on many
cyclocross courses.
--
Michael Press
|
| | |
Date: 09 Nov 2007 14:59:17
From: Tom Kunich
Subject: Re: First cyclocross race - race my mtn bike or touring bike?
|
"Michael Press" <rubrum@pacbell.net > wrote in message
news:rubrum-0A4A8C.10552409112007@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com...
>
> Is the tourer a true touring frame? A true touring
> frame has a lower bottom bracket, and is contra-indicated
> for cyclocross. Low tire pressure is fine on many
> cyclocross courses.
Not really Michael. Good cyclocross bikes used to have very low bottom
brackets since the tires life the BB an extra inch or so. What's more, on
very rough terrain you generally run and carry the bike.
If you can ride a cyclocross course faster with a high bottom bracket the
course is laid out incorrectly. Such courses would be as fast or faster on a
mountain bike.
|
|
