Carbon frame or Hydro brakes?
rozzer32
Posts: 3,561
I'm looking to get a cross bike to use as a winter bike with road wheels and then when I fancy I will put some cross wheels in and do a bit of racing.
I've kind of narrowed my choice down to these two bikes.
The Planet X XLS, lots of good reviews and seems a good spec for the money. Plenty of people recommend them.
Or a Whyte Saxon Cross. We get a good discount through work with Whyte so it's about the same price as the XLS. The new model (2015) comes with an ally frame/carbon fork with Sram Apex/Rival but it also comes with the new Sram S series hydraulic brakes.
So would you go for the hydro brakes over a carbon frame and mechanical discs? Also I know I'm bound to crash in cross and I know it's on "softer" ground but I wonder if the Ally frame could be a bit more robust??
Thoughts please.
I've kind of narrowed my choice down to these two bikes.
The Planet X XLS, lots of good reviews and seems a good spec for the money. Plenty of people recommend them.
Or a Whyte Saxon Cross. We get a good discount through work with Whyte so it's about the same price as the XLS. The new model (2015) comes with an ally frame/carbon fork with Sram Apex/Rival but it also comes with the new Sram S series hydraulic brakes.
So would you go for the hydro brakes over a carbon frame and mechanical discs? Also I know I'm bound to crash in cross and I know it's on "softer" ground but I wonder if the Ally frame could be a bit more robust??
Thoughts please.
***** Pro Tour Pundit Champion 2020, 2018, 2017 & 2011 *****
0
Posts
True, but a dent is manageable, while a crack is the end of the road and carbon fibre doesn't dent
Marin Nail Trail
Cotic Solaris
Yea that's what I was getting at. I'm sure as winter/cross racer the bike will take a bit of a beating. I have a carbon road bike but obviously road is different to cross.
Right well it seems the Whyte with hydros is the way to go then.
Yes I think so as these are the new S series brakes and not the Red version and they are on the 2015 models. I'm going to double check though.
The force required to put a dent in an ally tube would probably not do too much harm a CF tube. Obviously if you hit something hard enough, you will trash it, regardless of what it is made of. Carbon fibre probably has a higher impact resistance than aluminium in any case. I see loads of CF cross bikes being raced without issue.
Obviously choose whatever CX bike you want, but at least make your decisions based on knowledge, rather than misconception.
The Ridley I just bought is carbon and it's built like a tank, I rode the aluminium and the carbon versions (X Ride and X Fire) there was a big difference in ride quality over fast, dry bumpy trails, probably much less of a difference in the gloop, I can't speak for the Planet X as I've not ridden it but it has a good spec.
I must admit I did look at a wide range of bikes including last year's Saxon which did look great but I'm just not a fan of SRAM shifters
MTB
NEW Cross
Track/Grass Track/Winter bike
http://blog.brooksengland.com/wps/wp-co ... Wsport.jpg
MTB
NEW Cross
Track/Grass Track/Winter bike
Realistically, how many people with a CX bike actually use it for racing? If he wants to race, he shouldn't even consider discs in the first place
Exactly... mainly a commuter/winter bike...
The sram doesn't really bother me. I used to ride sram before having shimano on my new bike. The whyte geometry does look a bit strange but I think they have a different head tube angle. I take it cross bike sizing is the same as road bike sizing?
Yes and no. They tend to have shorter TTs and HTs for a given ST size..
Geometries are fairly similar; it always looks like the head tube is shorter, but in reality that's because the clearances are bigger on the fork, meaning the bottom headset bearings are further from the front wheel axle, and the head tube has to be shorter to compensate. I've ended up with almost identical geometries on my road and CX bikes (both of which are set up for racing), only difference is a couple of spacers under the stem of the CX bike.
The only major reason not to get discs these days, is that you have a shed full of wheels for rim brakes. The weight penalty is negligible, and you'll never wear out another rim again. Braking power is generally not a factor in races, though you'll occasionally come across a descent where disc brakes give you the confidence to push a bit harder.
either choice you'll be happy
Maintenance doesn't really bother me, I do all my own maintenance on my bikes anyway.
For this reason, I am weighing up what I would go for to replace my Tricross... It could either be a CX bike with cable disc, or some sort of ridgid 29er with MTB kit inc hydraulic brakes.
Problem is I use the Tricross for commuting, wet road rides, local off roads/exploring... a 29er would not excel at these, but could come in handy on a few local MTB races, where the terrain isn't too taxing. Hmm.
Do your local MTB races allow CX bikes? I know the Beastway races do, but don't know enough about MTB racing in general to know whether that's the norm.
I know the TriCross isn't a true CX, but from my time on it, it doesn't quite fit the job of the kind of lesser off road riding I want to do, find it hard to handle on some steeper climbs (wheels spin out) and some finer balancing and brake control insnt quite there. They can be raced in the local mtb races I do, but from the 2 I have done, I would choose the mtb each time, but I think a rigid 29 would be perfect.