Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: PSA: Gravel frameset on sale - Fuji Jari 1.1 at Performance - total steal... [Tom A.] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Compare what he currently rides instead--that's an old Synapse, which had high head tube, and thus negative stem. Saddle height is the same, and he uses 120mm stem on both. Gravel frame has slightly higher stack.

But to your point, he didn't like the old Synapse because of geometry but loves the new one, because of... geometry.
Quote Reply
Re: PSA: Gravel frameset on sale - Fuji Jari 1.1 at Performance - total steal... [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I should say, even though my position is almost the same, the geometry of my Focus Mares is different from my roadie.
4mm higher BB.
70.5 vs 73 head angle.
longer chainstays on the CX of course for tire clearance.

So, fit is almost the same, but handling is quite different.
The Focus would feel like driving a tank in a criterium, but might be ok for a road race.
My old Ridley CX bike and my current road bike have too short of wheel base and twitchy handling for gravel riding.
Quote Reply
Re: PSA: Gravel frameset on sale - Fuji Jari 1.1 at Performance - total steal... [Tom A.] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Tom A. wrote:
Slowman wrote:


in my opinion, the industry has converged. gravel geometry is road geometry, as regards fit. but we'll see. just, if this isn't it, then we're telling ourselves a fairy story when we say gravel bikes can be ridden as road bikes or gravel bikes with a wheel and/or tire change.


Depends on what you mean by "road bike". If you mean road racing bike...then yes, fantasy. If your "gravel bike" has modern road racing geometry and setup, then it's going to be less than ideal in the more "difficult" off-road conditions. That said, I probably tend to treat mine as a bit of a "fully rigid XC MTB" more than most ;-) Then again, I also have my road setup with the bar tops a bit higher than most, and rely on deep drops in my bars to get the most aero road position...so, my positional setups between the 2 probably aren't as great as others may have.

"Gravel" or "Adventure Bike" geometry and setup IMO should be more of a cross between old-school grand tour racing bike and a 80s/90s XC MTB...rather than a pure modern road geometry/setup. But, maybe that's just me...

I realize that S/R and geometry are not 1:1 but I've got my adventure S+/R+ set up identical to my S1. The wheelbases however are where the stability and nimbleness differences come out to play (85mm diff).

36 kona qualifiers 2006-'23 - 3 Kona Podiums - 4 OA IM AG wins - 5 IM AG wins - 18 70.3 AG wins
I ka nana no a 'ike -- by observing, one learns | Kulia i ka nu'u -- strive for excellence
Garmin Glycogen Use App | Garmin Fat Use App
Quote Reply
Re: PSA: Gravel frameset on sale - Fuji Jari 1.1 at Performance - total steal... [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The head tube height doesn’t bother me and I think Tom has a valid point about the height of the drops... but the B.B. is a bit high for sure.
Quote Reply
Re: PSA: Gravel frameset on sale - Fuji Jari 1.1 at Performance - total steal... [MarkyV] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I would find it hard to justify riding this geometry at any price. For me. B.B. too high. Stack way too high (I’d have to get a frame way too smal and try to lengthen it w/stem.

I think fit will end up being pretty road-similar. Where the jury is out is on geom for handling.

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: PSA: Gravel frameset on sale - Fuji Jari 1.1 at Performance - total steal... [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
you and i are steep and deep. not all riders are, so this frame fits them and we go off in search of something else. What's your gravel/adventure rig at the moment?

36 kona qualifiers 2006-'23 - 3 Kona Podiums - 4 OA IM AG wins - 5 IM AG wins - 18 70.3 AG wins
I ka nana no a 'ike -- by observing, one learns | Kulia i ka nu'u -- strive for excellence
Garmin Glycogen Use App | Garmin Fat Use App
Quote Reply
Re: PSA: Gravel frameset on sale - Fuji Jari 1.1 at Performance - total steal... [Carl Spackler] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Carl Spackler wrote:
Compare what he currently rides instead--that's an old Synapse, which had high head tube, and thus negative stem. Saddle height is the same, and he uses 120mm stem on both. Gravel frame has slightly higher stack.

But to your point, he didn't like the old Synapse because of geometry but loves the new one, because of... geometry.

Well...if his current position on his road bike is the same as what he rides on gravel now, then he's changed his road position from when he was a ProTour rider. Which makes sense for what he concentrates on for racing now, and his training.

But, the changed position also shows that Dan might be slightly off-base in thinking "best" road position and "best" gravel position are identical. When TK was primarily riding road races, he rode with his bars lower and further out...now, not so much.

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/
Quote Reply
Re: PSA: Gravel frameset on sale - Fuji Jari 1.1 at Performance - total steal... [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Slowman wrote:
I would find it hard to justify riding this geometry at any price.
For me. B.B. too high. Stack way too high (I’d have to get a frame way too smal and try to lengthen it w/stem.

I think fit will end up being pretty road-similar. Where the jury is out is on geom for handling.


Really? Looks like it's smack dab in the middle of typical for a road racing bike:

Quote:
Most bike manufacturers have settled on 65-70mm of BB drop in their frame geometries for race bikes.


https://cyclingtips.com/...ry-of-bike-handling/


And "stack way too high"? I'm thinking that maybe some of your admitted difficulties in handling rougher conditions off-road might be related to that opinion...you might want to try raising your bars and moving them back slightly ;-)

edit: BTW, I looked up both a Synapse and a Slate (you have one of those, right?) and in a size 56 Synapse, the stack is only 2mm less than the Jari, while the size L Slate is only 10mm less. Also BTW, the BB drop of the Slate is actually LESS than the Jari (at 65mm vs. 67mm)...so, is the Jari really as wacked geometry-wise as you infer? I'm not seeing it...

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/
Last edited by: Tom A.: Jun 13, 18 11:40
Quote Reply
Re: PSA: Gravel frameset on sale - Fuji Jari 1.1 at Performance - total steal... [Tom A.] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I assume with all the mounts, this would make a a pretty lightweight touring bike too, no?

Strava
Quote Reply
Re: PSA: Gravel frameset on sale - Fuji Jari 1.1 at Performance - total steal... [gmh39] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
gmh39 wrote:
I assume with all the mounts, this would make a a pretty lightweight touring bike too, no?

It sure could. Bikepacking as well.

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/
Quote Reply
Re: PSA: Gravel frameset on sale - Fuji Jari 1.1 at Performance - total steal... [Tom A.] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
How is it different? The Synapse picture you posted was a prior version, which had a high head tube (and thus negative stem). He didn't use that on Supersix. First-hand, there has been very little change in his position from then to now.

Best of each position is the same as saying best bike; it's obvious there could be some nuances to 100% optimize for either. But I don't think that for 90% of the cases there's much difference.
Quote Reply
Re: PSA: Gravel frameset on sale - Fuji Jari 1.1 at Performance - total steal... [Tom A.] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
But who wants brown or bronze?
Quote Reply
Re: PSA: Gravel frameset on sale - Fuji Jari 1.1 at Performance - total steal... [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I think "gravel bike fit" really means the frame will fit 40mm tires ;-)
Quote Reply
Re: PSA: Gravel frameset on sale - Fuji Jari 1.1 at Performance - total steal... [NordicSkier] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
NordicSkier wrote:
Slowman wrote:


in my opinion, the industry has converged. gravel geometry is road geometry, as regards fit. but we'll see. just, if this isn't it, then we're telling ourselves a fairy story when we say gravel bikes can be ridden as road bikes or gravel bikes with a wheel and/or tire change.


My road and CX/gravel fit are almost identical which surprised me.
The one big difference is 44cm vs 38cm bars.

Is there a different stem length+reach measurement on the bike with 44cm vs the bike with 38cm bars?

Suffer Well.
Quote Reply
Re: PSA: Gravel frameset on sale - Fuji Jari 1.1 at Performance - total steal... [jmh] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
jmh wrote:
NordicSkier wrote:
Slowman wrote:


in my opinion, the industry has converged. gravel geometry is road geometry, as regards fit. but we'll see. just, if this isn't it, then we're telling ourselves a fairy story when we say gravel bikes can be ridden as road bikes or gravel bikes with a wheel and/or tire change.


My road and CX/gravel fit are almost identical which surprised me.
The one big difference is 44cm vs 38cm bars.


Is there a different stem length+reach measurement on the bike with 44cm vs the bike with 38cm bars?

I recall measuring from the middle of the seat on both bikes to the hoods and it was close to identical. IIRC, my CX bike has about 7-8mm less reach, so the wider bars keep the overall reach the same. If I wasn't at work, I would go measure it...
Quote Reply
Re: PSA: Gravel frameset on sale - Fuji Jari 1.1 at Performance - total steal... [Carl Spackler] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Carl Spackler wrote:
How is it different? The Synapse picture you posted was a prior version, which had a high head tube (and thus negative stem). He didn't use that on Supersix.

Of course he didn't. The 2 bikes have different stacks.

But, you're focusing on the head tube and stem...we're talking about the position of the bars relative to the BB, regardless of how connections are made between them.

I don't have the right software handy right now to do a proper overlay (perhaps later). But, I know that when grabbing those 2 pics and scaling them to the same size, in the program I was using the pic being moved is displayed transparently, so I could see the 2 at the same time on top of each other. Line up the BBs on both and the bars on the DK rig are obviously higher and closer in (relative to the BB) than the position he used during the TdF. It also looks like his seat might be slightly lower too...you'll see what I mean with the overlay.

Carl Spackler wrote:
First-hand, there has been very little change in his position from then to now.

The objective pics appear to be telling a different story...

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/
Quote Reply
Re: PSA: Gravel frameset on sale - Fuji Jari 1.1 at Performance - total steal... [Herbert] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Herbert wrote:
But who wants brown or bronze?


Oh Herbert...always a "fashion plate" :-/

Anyway...I'm pretty sure it's a bronze anodize with a clear coat (or a VERY clear base layer), so you actually see a bit of the base aluminum. I actually like it slightly better than the clear coat over brushed aluminum on my model.

In any case, at that price you can afford to paint it however you want (or completely strip it and polish) and still be money ahead.

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/
Last edited by: Tom A.: Jun 13, 18 13:49
Quote Reply
Re: PSA: Gravel frameset on sale - Fuji Jari 1.1 at Performance - total steal... [Tom A.] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
OK - so this I did it - I picked up one of these frames! Now how should I build it out? Mostly concerned about some fun wheels (maybe in the $1k range)
Quote Reply
Re: PSA: Gravel frameset on sale - Fuji Jari 1.1 at Performance - total steal... [Tom A.] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Tom A. wrote:
Slowman wrote:
I would find it hard to justify riding this geometry at any price.
For me. B.B. too high. Stack way too high (I’d have to get a frame way too smal and try to lengthen it w/stem.

I think fit will end up being pretty road-similar. Where the jury is out is on geom for handling.


Really? Looks like it's smack dab in the middle of typical for a road racing bike:

Quote:
Most bike manufacturers have settled on 65-70mm of BB drop in their frame geometries for race bikes.


https://cyclingtips.com/...ry-of-bike-handling/

And "stack way too high"? I'm thinking that maybe some of your admitted difficulties in handling rougher conditions off-road might be related to that opinion...you might want to try raising your bars and moving them back slightly ;-)

edit: BTW, I looked up both a Synapse and a Slate (you have one of those, right?) and in a size 56 Synapse, the stack is only 2mm less than the Jari, while the size L Slate is only 10mm less. Also BTW, the BB drop of the Slate is actually LESS than the Jari (at 65mm vs. 67mm)...so, is the Jari really as wacked geometry-wise as you infer? I'm not seeing it...


let's unpack this one piece at a time. my supersix evo, which has a pretty midrange road race geometry, in size 58cm has:

stack: 577mm
reach: 399mm

there's a lot more variance throughout the size run in stack than there is in reach, so, i'm really fitting more to reach. the closest in this fuji to matching my supersix's reach is the XXL, and that bike's geometry is:

stack: 628mm
reach: 397mm

were i to try to match the stack of my supersix, it would be the size M:

stack: 572mm
reach: 370mm

this means, if i ride the same road bar on both bikes, i'd need a 150mm stem on the fuji to make it work, which i reall don't want to do, because the front:center on that bike is at least 15mm shorter than what i'm riding now.

as far as this being "smack dab in the middle of typical for a road racing bike" i would ride a specialized tarmac/venge in size 56cm:

stack: 566m
reach: 395mm

this fuji is closer to roubaix geometry. it's taller than a synapse, cannondale's endurance geometry. it's taller than a roadlite, canyon's endurance geometry. it's taller than a defy, giant's endurance geometry. it's nowhere near the geometry of any of these companies' road race bikes.

i like that fuji lengthened the chain stay. i just don't like much of the rest of it.

as to the rest of it. yes, i own a slate. but i didn't design it. i did design the BB drop of my everyday gravel rider, which is my litespeed, and i gave that 75mm or 80mm of BB drop.

as to "admitted difficulties in handling rougher conditions off-road" i guess i'm grading on a curve. the sexagenarians are finding it not so easy to beat the old man now that he's back in swim/bike/run shape for the first time in a decade. but to your point, i'm quite happy with my litespeed's geometry. where i'm still experimenting is with tire pressure and tire profile.

but if you want to test the old man's capacity firsthand, up close, i'll give you advance warning of my racing schedule ;-)

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Last edited by: Slowman: Jun 13, 18 14:41
Quote Reply
Re: PSA: Gravel frameset on sale - Fuji Jari 1.1 at Performance - total steal... [VGB] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
VGB wrote:
OK - so this I did it - I picked up one of these frames! Now how should I build it out? Mostly concerned about some fun wheels (maybe in the $1k range)


This platform seems like a good match for a set of Mavic Ksyrium Elite Allroad UST wheels with the 40c Yksion Elite Allroad XL UST tires.

"They're made of latex, not nitroglycerin"
Quote Reply
Re: PSA: Gravel frameset on sale - Fuji Jari 1.1 at Performance - total steal... [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Slowman wrote:
Tom A. wrote:
Slowman wrote:
I would find it hard to justify riding this geometry at any price.
For me. B.B. too high. Stack way too high (I’d have to get a frame way too smal and try to lengthen it w/stem.

I think fit will end up being pretty road-similar. Where the jury is out is on geom for handling.


Really? Looks like it's smack dab in the middle of typical for a road racing bike:

Quote:
Most bike manufacturers have settled on 65-70mm of BB drop in their frame geometries for race bikes.


https://cyclingtips.com/...ry-of-bike-handling/

And "stack way too high"? I'm thinking that maybe some of your admitted difficulties in handling rougher conditions off-road might be related to that opinion...you might want to try raising your bars and moving them back slightly ;-)

edit: BTW, I looked up both a Synapse and a Slate (you have one of those, right?) and in a size 56 Synapse, the stack is only 2mm less than the Jari, while the size L Slate is only 10mm less. Also BTW, the BB drop of the Slate is actually LESS than the Jari (at 65mm vs. 67mm)...so, is the Jari really as wacked geometry-wise as you infer? I'm not seeing it...


let's unpack this one piece at a time. my supersix evo, which has a pretty midrange road race geometry, in size 58cm has:

stack: 577mm
reach: 399mm

there's a lot more variance throughout the size run in stack than there is in reach, so, i'm really fitting more to reach. the closest in this fuji to matching my supersix's reach is the XXL, and that bike's geometry is:

stack: 628mm
reach: 397mm

were i to try to match the stack of my supersix, it would be the size M:

stack: 572mm
reach: 370mm

this means, if i ride the same road bar on both bikes, i'd need a 150mm stem on the fuji to make it work, which i reall don't want to do, because the front:center on that bike is at least 15mm shorter than what i'm riding now.

as far as this being "smack dab in the middle of typical for a road racing bike" i would ride a specialized tarmac/venge in size 56cm (i.e., specialized's road race geometry):

stack: 566m
reach: 395mm

this fuji is closer to roubaix geometry, specialized's endurance geometry. it's taller than a synapse, cannondale's endurance geometry. it's taller than a roadlite, canyon's endurance geometry. it's taller than a defy, giant's endurance geometry. it's nowhere near the geometry of any of these companies' road race bikes.

i like that fuji lengthened the chain stay. i just don't like much of the rest of it.

as to the rest of it. yes, i own a slate. but i didn't design it. i did design the BB drop of my everyday gravel rider, which is my litespeed, and i gave that 75mm or 80mm of BB drop.

as to "admitted difficulties in handling rougher conditions off-road" i guess i'm grading on a curve. the sexagenarians are finding it not so easy to beat the old man now that he's back in swim/bike/run shape for the first time in a decade. but to your point, i'm quite happy with my litespeed's geometry. where i'm still experimenting is with tire pressure and tire profile.

but if you want to test the old man's capacity firsthand, up close, i'll give you advance warning of my racing schedule ;-)

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: PSA: Gravel frameset on sale - Fuji Jari 1.1 at Performance - total steal... [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Slowman wrote:
Tom A. wrote:
Slowman wrote:
I would find it hard to justify riding this geometry at any price.
For me. B.B. too high. Stack way too high (I’d have to get a frame way too smal and try to lengthen it w/stem.

I think fit will end up being pretty road-similar. Where the jury is out is on geom for handling.


Really? Looks like it's smack dab in the middle of typical for a road racing bike:

Quote:
Most bike manufacturers have settled on 65-70mm of BB drop in their frame geometries for race bikes.


https://cyclingtips.com/...ry-of-bike-handling/

And "stack way too high"? I'm thinking that maybe some of your admitted difficulties in handling rougher conditions off-road might be related to that opinion...you might want to try raising your bars and moving them back slightly ;-)

edit: BTW, I looked up both a Synapse and a Slate (you have one of those, right?) and in a size 56 Synapse, the stack is only 2mm less than the Jari, while the size L Slate is only 10mm less. Also BTW, the BB drop of the Slate is actually LESS than the Jari (at 65mm vs. 67mm)...so, is the Jari really as wacked geometry-wise as you infer? I'm not seeing it...


let's unpack this one piece at a time. my supersix evo, which has a pretty midrange road race geometry, in size 58cm has:

stack: 577mm
reach: 399mm

there's a lot more variance throughout the size run in stack than there is in reach, so, i'm really fitting more to reach. the closest in this fuji to matching my supersix's reach is the XXL, and that bike's geometry is:

stack: 628mm
reach: 397mm

were i to try to match the stack of my supersix, it would be the size M:

stack: 572mm
reach: 370mm

this means, if i ride the same road bar on both bikes, i'd need a 150mm stem on the fuji to make it work, which i reall don't want to do, because the front:center on that bike is at least 15mm shorter than what i'm riding now.

What stem angle and length do you have on the supersix? Any spacers under the stem, and what's the topcap height?

And, why are you ignoring the size L Fuji?

stack: 592mm
reach: 379mm

I bet you could set that up with 1-2cm less stack and reach than your "pure road" position (just using the same stem and bars) and have a better time of it in the dirt. BTW, "same bars" might not be always a good idea for a bike intended to be ridden off-road. I like having a bit of drop flare, so that when in the drops my hands are rotated closer to a typical hand position on a MTB bar. That helps a bunch with dirt surface control IMO.

Slowman wrote:
as far as this being "smack dab in the middle of typical for a road racing bike" i would ride a specialized tarmac/venge in size 56cm...

Wait...I was specifically talking about BB drop. That's why my quote of it is bolded and italicized.


Slowman wrote:
but if you want to test the old man's capacity firsthand, up close, i'll give you advance warning of my racing schedule ;-)

Just let me know next time you're in SB. I'll take you on my favorite rides and we'll see how you do ;-)

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/
Quote Reply
Re: PSA: Gravel frameset on sale - Fuji Jari 1.1 at Performance - total steal... [VGB] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
VGB wrote:
OK - so this I did it - I picked up one of these frames! Now how should I build it out? Mostly concerned about some fun wheels (maybe in the $1k range)

The Zipp Course 30s I mentioned earlier are pretty fun, and ~$1K for the set.

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/
Quote Reply
Re: PSA: Gravel frameset on sale - Fuji Jari 1.1 at Performance - total steal... [Tom A.] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Tom A. wrote:
Slowman wrote:
Tom A. wrote:
Slowman wrote:
I would find it hard to justify riding this geometry at any price.
For me. B.B. too high. Stack way too high (I’d have to get a frame way too smal and try to lengthen it w/stem.

I think fit will end up being pretty road-similar. Where the jury is out is on geom for handling.


Really? Looks like it's smack dab in the middle of typical for a road racing bike:

Quote:
Most bike manufacturers have settled on 65-70mm of BB drop in their frame geometries for race bikes.


https://cyclingtips.com/...ry-of-bike-handling/

And "stack way too high"? I'm thinking that maybe some of your admitted difficulties in handling rougher conditions off-road might be related to that opinion...you might want to try raising your bars and moving them back slightly ;-)

edit: BTW, I looked up both a Synapse and a Slate (you have one of those, right?) and in a size 56 Synapse, the stack is only 2mm less than the Jari, while the size L Slate is only 10mm less. Also BTW, the BB drop of the Slate is actually LESS than the Jari (at 65mm vs. 67mm)...so, is the Jari really as wacked geometry-wise as you infer? I'm not seeing it...


let's unpack this one piece at a time. my supersix evo, which has a pretty midrange road race geometry, in size 58cm has:

stack: 577mm
reach: 399mm

there's a lot more variance throughout the size run in stack than there is in reach, so, i'm really fitting more to reach. the closest in this fuji to matching my supersix's reach is the XXL, and that bike's geometry is:

stack: 628mm
reach: 397mm

were i to try to match the stack of my supersix, it would be the size M:

stack: 572mm
reach: 370mm

this means, if i ride the same road bar on both bikes, i'd need a 150mm stem on the fuji to make it work, which i reall don't want to do, because the front:center on that bike is at least 15mm shorter than what i'm riding now.


What stem angle and length do you have on the supersix? Any spacers under the stem, and what's the topcap height?

And, why are you ignoring the size L Fuji?

stack: 592mm
reach: 379mm

I bet you could set that up with 1-2cm less stack and reach than your "pure road" position (just using the same stem and bars) and have a better time of it in the dirt. BTW, "same bars" might not be always a good idea for a bike intended to be ridden off-road. I like having a bit of drop flare, so that when in the drops my hands are rotated closer to a typical hand position on a MTB bar. That helps a bunch with dirt surface control IMO.

Slowman wrote:

as far as this being "smack dab in the middle of typical for a road racing bike" i would ride a specialized tarmac/venge in size 56cm...


Wait...I was specifically talking about BB drop. That's why my quote of it is bolded and italicized.


Slowman wrote:

but if you want to test the old man's capacity firsthand, up close, i'll give you advance warning of my racing schedule ;-)


Just let me know next time you're in SB. I'll take you on my favorite rides and we'll see how you do ;-)

my supersix has a 120mm -17° stem, 5mm of spacer and a 5mm headset top cap. this is why i can't ride a venge in 58, altho my supersix is a 58. the L fuji i couldn't ride for the same reason. the ONLY fuji i could ride is the XXL, and that would be pretty disastrous.

the slate is an interesting bike. i've always found cannondale a compelling company, because it takes risks and thinks around the corner. but if you look at what that company is going to sell to gravel cyclists, going forward, it's not that bike. it's the superx, or something even lower in front, like the supersix evo.

that said, there'll be gravel bikes throughout the range. why wouldn't there be? if we need road bikes in both road race and endurance geometry, we'll need gravel bikes in both geometries. what i'm arguing is that your gravel bike will fit just like your road bike fits. no difference. so, gravel stack and reach will equal road stack and reach. what happens underneath all that - chain stay, steering geometry, BB drop - that's what's still up in the air. i know how i think it should go, but we'll see.

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: PSA: Gravel frameset on sale - Fuji Jari 1.1 at Performance - total steal... [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Slowman wrote:
what i'm arguing is that your gravel bike will fit just like your road bike fits. no difference. so, gravel stack and reach will equal road stack and reach.

That's where we disagree. Road and gravel/allroad/adventure/whatever are different use cases, with the later having quite a wide spectrum of possibilities. My argument is that since the use case is somewhere between a road bike and a MTB, the positions and geometry should be as well.

But, like I implied earlier, that may be because I tend to use mine more on the MTB/singletrack end of the spectrum as opposed to the paved-road/double-track centric end of that spectrum. This is especially so because my pure road bike also has a bit of "capability overlap" into the the latter end of the spectrum due to its ability to run up to 30mm wide tires in the frame, and up to 34-36mm wide in the fork. If a particular ride is heavy on pavement and smoother dirt roads, I'll probably just put the wide tire wheelset on the road bike. If there's going to be rougher stuff in the ride plan, then I grab the Fuji.

So yeah...if your idea of gravel/allroad/adventure/whatever is paved-road/double-track, then identical to road position/geometry can work just fine.

But, if your idea of gravel/allroad/adventure/whatever is more like "drop-bar, rigid MTB", then IMO a switch to position/geometry closer to endurance/touring/80s XC MTB is more appropriate.

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/
Quote Reply

Prev Next